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.

Non-Tech : Enamelon (ENML) - Does anyone follow this? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chester lee who wrote (735)	10/26/1998 3:54:00 AM
From: Q.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 863

Chester, in evaluating ENML, I assume that the product actually has advantages over other fluoride toothpastes in preventing caries. I have shorted the stock because of this small company's prospects: they have blundered by launching the product before they completed enough studies to get ADA endorsement and permission to make broader claims for the product than for competitors. So they are burning up their cash in a premature marketing campaign. Here's something from their web page: 6. IS ENAMELON® ACCEPTED OR ENDORSED BY THE ADA? As with many new oral care products, Enamelon does not carry the ADA seal of approval. Enamelon, Inc. is developing the data required for presentation to the ADA in pursuit of the ADA seal of acceptance. Because of the extensive requirements, this will be a lengthy process. Regarding the product's efficacy, it looks like the co. is beginning to accumulate some clinical evidence to support broader claims: You can find abstracts of several scientific papers on the co.'s web site: enamelon.com These papers mostly report results by university researchers who were funded by enamelon. They tested enamelon against crest regular toothpaste and against non-fluoridated toothpaste, in groups of about 20 patients. Some of the studies focused on carie prevention, others on measuring tooth remineralization. It looks like the benefit provided by enamelon vs. crest is real and measureable. But the papers cite a need for further studies with larger numbers of patients. That suggests to me that the co. isn't very close to getting the ADA's permission to broaden their marketing claims of product efficacy. Meanwhile the co. is burning cash marketing the product without the ability to claim these benefits. A funny thing about the co.'s web page: I think it is odd that a co. that was founded by a scientist to sell fluoridated toothpaste can't correctly spell the word 'fluoridated'. They got it wrong all over the place in the page I cited above.