Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : IGEN International -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Perry who wrote (386)	7/16/1998 8:56:00 AM
From: John Zwiener	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1025

Hi James, I don't know if Roche is an effectively performing partner with Igen other than I heard that they were increasing spending on new electsys tests and next generation instruments. One thing that will be important will be for Roche to come clean with Igen. More people are percieving that Roche is unfairly shortchanging Igen and this seems to hurt consideration of Roche instruments, resulting in default to Abbott. Now I don't know if Abbott does the same thing, but the fact is it is a minus for Roche since this situation upsets those looking at instruments to use (somehow I doubt that Roche thinks that this is important, big company blindness). I'm not sure if the Roche posts on the rumor mill help much with respect to Igen, those posts seem to have mainly to do with the employees, and I didn't get a clear picture of how good or bad they treat them, seems like the usual situation. I've noticed that new potential tests seem to be licensed to small companies like Igen. The atrial naturietic peptide test may be an interesting test with good potential, though I need to compare the various forms and reread some material to confirm, but at this time, I'm under the impression that this test in some form will become a common and useful test. I wouldn't be surprised to see other new good tests go to Igen. The E. coli test is mentioned to be 10-100 times more sensitive, which is great from the government perspective. But I would have thought that Igen would have mentioned that it is probably more specific (who's antibody are they using?), resulting in fewer false positive tests that would require further testing or unnecessary disposing of the hamburger, or whatever, this would appeal to the industry. Cryptosporidium testing. Igen didn't mention sensitivity here, but one can assume for the time being it will also be much more sensitive, and probably more specific. This could also end up being a recommended test.