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 : Monsanto Co. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Anthony Wong who wrote (1019)	1/30/1999 3:35:00 PM
From: twt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2539

Hi Anthony, I jumped back in in low 40's :-) Seeing the number of Rx's in recent reports made me a little more confident that Celebrex will be well received. What's your opinion on this? The high number of Rx was due to the free samples given by Searle or real Rx? When is the new numbers come out again? Thanks Anthony. Regards.

To: Anthony Wong who wrote (1019)	1/30/1999 3:54:00 PM
From: Dan Spillane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2539

Once again, I correctly interpreted. Note, Searle makes the same point I was making a while back. That is, note my earlier comments about the title of the second "rehash" of the study. I said I was "suspicious of the catchy title"; here's what Monsanto/Searle had to say about the same thing. (from the story) "The press release doesn't really reflect what was in the study," Isakson said. ... Isakson said that while the study itself did not show an elevated cardiovascular risk, the headline of news release related to the study and put out by the University of Pennsylvania, where the study was carried out, suggested it. One of my earlier comments: Message 7340573