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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Pharmos(PARS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Israel-Rosen who wrote (1370)	10/9/1998 8:53:00 PM
From: yosi s	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1491

David my take on the release is three fold. 1. the decrease in ICP is very important. and is not due to chance. It is consistent with the model of how hu211 works. but what is the most important is... 2. Clinically those patients that were severly affected . Being very sick but not dying nor comatose. showed the best improvement. or as Said by their chief investigator, the improvement was in all the LEVELS BUT SEEN BEST IN THE MODERATE TO SEVERE. Now that is wht I have a good degree of confidence that phase 3 will prove what phase 2 showed. In a small sample. you can see best where the difference is most. and that is exactly what happened. So if this is due to random events there are just too many things that follow a pattern. 3. Safety issue there is none. it is safer then placebo. Blood Pressure is better maintained. this may also play in mechanisme of action. or it may be that it counter acts Alpha TNF. THIS is worthwhile looking into. IT MAY BE BIGGER THAN BRAIN INJURY ALONE. Until this is well understood we will complain about the price.

To: David Israel-Rosen who wrote (1370)	10/9/1998 9:04:00 PM
From: Timothy Kross	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1491

There are several thoughts that I have about the design of phase III study for Hu 211. First, I believe that the chance to maximize therapeutic efficacy will be in administering the drug in a shorter period of time. Looking back on the cardiac thrombolysis studies in acute myocardial infarction, it became clear that earlier administration improved efficacy. I suspect that we could see greater efficacy if the drug is given under two or three hours. This is something that could be pursued. Second, I wonder what dose escalations can be given without toxicity. If we choose the 150 mg dose, how do we know that 200mg or 300 mg might not be even more efficacious with little increase in toxicity. Third, I would hope for the larger numbers of a phase III study to give larger subset analysis to identify specific subgroups that would benefit most from the drug. Let's hope that the phase III partner can help design a protocol that would help put HU 211 in the best light.

To: David Israel-Rosen who wrote (1370)	10/9/1998 9:16:00 PM
From: arnie h	Respond to of 1491

David: When in Israel with Prof. Aviv, in addition to your concerns about PR, you might keep these aspects in mind; * How are BOL sales coming along and what is the outlook for reaching projected market shares? When will Phase II data be finalized and are the discussions with partner candidates progressing? What does the company plan to do with the 3M share registration they made last month? Timing? * Does cash flow still look strong enough to reach Q2'99 without need for additional financing? * How many CC holders are there? How many shares have they converted? What % of holders have converted? * Do they have a feel for who is dumping stock? Distribution has picked up again after the heavy selling from early August well into September had abated for a week. * Why has the short position returned to historic highs? Be safe and have a productive trip, Arnie

To: David Israel-Rosen who wrote (1370)	10/9/1998 9:29:00 PM
From: wolfdog2	Respond to of 1491

David, I hope that in my last post I didn't seem insensitive to your position of having a major investment wallow after reporting spectacular results. I would point out, however, that the first thing mentioned in the press release was the significant reduction in intracranial pressure. I really don't think that the mention of a 26% reduction in the mortality rate when comparing the control and the test group was the cause in the stock's failure to rise. We are and have been in a severe bear market in small cap stocks for some time. The ill treatment given PARS has been repeated though out the broad market. I suspect that in a few months time we will all look back on this period as great buying opportunity, even though we all would have wished that the opportunity had come and gone this past Wednesday. Regards, Ken