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: Cacaito who wrote (7958)	12/6/1998 9:56:00 AM
From: Robert K.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17367

Hi Cacaito, nice to see your post again. RobertS> more points. Regarding> You where questioning whether a anti-endotoxin alone will be beneficial in sepsis.< 1. Your question if a antiendotoxin is helpful at all IMO>cant say but if any anti-endotoxin will work it will be bpi 2. Your question whether bpi will work in sepsis IMO> cant say since sepsis is broad and generally undefinable and trial are ongoing. 3. Your inference that since a anti-endotoxin may not work, then bpi also may not work. IMO>bpi is a multi-faceted molecule with multiple capabilites and multiply potential uses. (anti endo,anti heparin,antibiotic,etc..) IMO its the combination capabilites that make it a wild card. Example>sepsis may have endotoxin AND gram neg bacteria. Either one may cause patient harm, which one is bpi protecting from one or both or neither? NOTE>you cant have endotoxin without gram negative bacteria> IMO thats a interesting FACT. Either one can be the cause of patient harm. Which one is bpi's true target/potential benefit? All IMO.

To: Cacaito who wrote (7958)	12/6/1998 8:31:00 PM
From: Robert S.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17367

Cacaito, your insights and opinions are always welcomed and appreciated. I often find your posts informative but it is my opinion that your enthusiasm, as an investor, has clouded your objectivity, as a scientist. Robert S maybe should politely look beyond the abstracts of his persistently mentioned "reviews" so He could show that BPI is or is not one of the failure molecules mentioned in the again "reviews". You have insinuated, once again, that a review is less worthy than an original study; while this oftentimes may be true, it is by no means absolute. Conversely, an original study does not guarantee the quality of the research. I disagree with your outlook and addressed this issue in an earlier post: Message 6246744 Furthermore, a plethora of reviews, forum presentations, editorials, etc., which presented BPI in a positive light, elicited no voice of protest from you; thus, I believe it is reasonable for me to conclude that you "want to have it both ways."