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 : Sepracor-Looks very promising -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jeffbas who wrote (3109)	5/31/1999 10:49:00 PM
From: Don Miller	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10280

No challenge was inferred from you post. I cited their reviews in most efficient way I could relate our discussion. I tend to type the minimum to get the point across, so may be my post sounded gruff. The Tanox drug has been explored with four posters with sufficient technical background and said to be impractically expensive, not especially efficacious, and thought to be years off time wise, even if it could prove to be competitive. Being an chemical engineer I always believe a production method can be improved and costs reduced. But if the drug does not work well, the process improvement effort is not warranted. The Sunday CBS news was not transcribed as of earlier today. I have not rechecked as of this hour. There is a mid-May report discussing the Tanox drug on the CBS web site. We have already discussed the Tanox drug pretty thoroughly at the yahoo\sepracor club (YC) and here. More will be found on YC. We would appreciate if you could followup on this report for us to 1)make sure it is the Tanox drug, and 2) bring the full CBS report to us for deeper technical review of anything new. In todays competitive and HMO environment I doubt if doctors could do anything as you suggest. To the contray they to a man have questioned the prospects of an expensive drug or treatment.