SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
An SI Board Since May 1996
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
2539 20 0 MTC
Emcee:  David Luckie Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Market Data Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
1964 My favorite headlines involving Celebrex: "500,000 Orgasms in Senior CitiDan Spillane-4/21/1999
1963 I didn't see the headline, but you would have to prove that the headline waJGoren-4/21/1999
1962 I wonder if there are any grounds for libel against the WSJ? The headline, placDan Spillane-4/21/1999
1961 MONSANTO SHARES FALL ON SAFETY CONCERNS OF CELEBREX Magic 25 stock Monsanto is JGoren-4/21/1999
1960 Why not this headline--Celebrix linked to 30 auto deaths! There have been 30 pDavid Winkler-4/21/1999
1959 Bottom line does Celebrex relieve pain ? I have been taking Celebrex for 3 montron forgus-4/21/1999
1958 ok, lets here it screw the individual predictions of certain products where wravi mali-4/21/1999
1957 Hmmm. Merck's Vioxx has an edema side effect which the FDA panel worries abDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1956 The first "normal" coverage I have seen on GM crops coming from the UDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1955 More good news for Monsanto/Celebrex (but I predicted this too) My earlier prDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1954 Well my calculations -- based on the WSJ 3-month numbers -- estimate that CelebDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1953 Wrong post, I'm afraid but I follow your math. You mention Tylenol or aspiProfessor Dotcomm-4/20/1999
1952 The latest Vioxx news could bode well for Monsanto's pipeline. SpecificallyDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1951 (cross-post from Yahoo) Call for WSJ retraction/correction You need to look atDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1950 Ah well...back to the drawing board Professor Dotcomm-4/20/1999
1949 We need to demand a retraction that includes the number-crunching, which shows Dan Spillane-4/20/1999
1948 Agree that debunking the numbers is not ridiculous. That they were published iDavid Winkler-4/20/1999
1947 Here's the phone numbers of the WSJ Medical reporters. Call them and tell tDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1946 I wouldn't put much significance in any of these numbers. The average age David Winkler-4/20/1999
1945 That's what I said in my original comments...the GI benefits would pan out Dan Spillane-4/20/1999
1944 Dan: With Celebrex only on the market for a few weeks I doubt any of the gastroJoe Wesley-4/20/1999
1943 Dr. Geis, who declined to go into the details of any cases of death linked to Nathan L.-4/20/1999
1942 The WSJ should not have carried such a story without doing the math. The headliDan Spillane-4/20/1999
1941 That study is only for "classic" CJD, not the bovine-related form. (Dan Spillane-4/20/1999
1940 Dan, I can not believe the wallstreet is full of Morons, who can not interpret Bindusagar Reddy-4/20/1999
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News