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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert S. who wrote (7517)	10/22/1998 12:18:00 PM
From: Bluegreen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17367

By the way Cacaito, by all means explain also the possible difference in membrane stability of gram negative bacteria in spinal fluid versus bloodstream. Are the electrostatic parameters even closely related in these two highly diverse mediums? Must you go back to explaining how BPI destroys gram neg. bacterial cell membranes? How would BPI communicate with LBP, etc., when injected directly into spinal fluid as in Lutsar study? Looks like you will have to also explain to some scientific challenged individuals the differences between Meningo. and Meningitis. I can't help but wonder if the same individuals that came up with the Lutsar study put gasoline in their crankcase instead of their fuel tanks when their fuel gage read empty.

To: Robert S. who wrote (7517)	10/22/1998 12:31:00 PM
From: Robert K.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17367

Robert S. > You find a negative article then you focus on it. Well IMO you picked the wrong article. Anyone with a indepth medical backround will probably pick it apart and shred it. I cant cause I dont have the knowledge to do it, but just wait and see the answers you get. Actually you are doing the bull case a favor by bringing this negative article to the attention of the better qualified. Lets see what they do with it. I wait with anticipation. Thanks Robert S. All IMO.

To: Robert S. who wrote (7517)	10/23/1998 9:18:00 PM
From: Cacaito	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17367

Robert S, 1. Studies were done under different protocols and is less informative to compare them. 2. The Bpi study tell you how they dumped lots of bacteria inside the CFS to create meningitis, the Gentamicin study did not tell you (at least in the abstract). 3. Once a day Gentamicin give you a better peak and better toxicity to bacteria and human kidneys, so forget about it, you can do that to a poor rabbit but not to a human being. If you are interested in aminoglycosides (drugs like gentamicin)in better delivery systems go to NXTR website they are working on that. 4. The cephalosporins and quinolones can do what gentamicin does without the kidney damage, they are prefer drugs, and the aminoglycosides are going slowly away (notice I said "slowly"), their best future seems to be the NXTR solution. 5. Most important: the more killing and the more bacteria deaths the more inflamation, you will still NEED an inmuno-inflamation-modulator molecule like BPI. It is not just to kill the bugs, it is to avoid spreading their innards on the floor so you will only need a broom, not the soap, water and a mop. 6. Meningitis is not the same as meningococcemia. It is just for historical reasons that all this names are confused with each other. Bpi is for sepsis (like meningococcemia, the actual indication of the phase III trial), not for meningitis (and it could turn to be quite good for this indication too). Sepsis is the big market anyway. Concentrate in the sepsis possibilities, that is why the phase II in abdominal infections results are very encouraging, and very important. This study validates more the antisepsis abilities for all gram negative, not just meningococcemia. So is the Cystic Fibrosis antipseudomonas studies.