1.Post 3834 last paragraph addresses specifically the applicability to Sucanon.
2.Regarding my professional credentials, the only applicability is specific knowledge and experience with studies, statistics, disclosure and familiarity with general treatment of medical conditions. Like any professional I tend to be careful what I claim, and have only ever spoken as a shareholder with experience in the above. In terms of approving Sucanon use that is not in any way my role. That is left to the applicable regulatory bodies in the country where Sucanon is sold. In Mexico, it was approved and is currently sold without prescription in far macias Similares and other stores nationwide. Sucanon was endorsed by MDA recently and back in 2007, when it also received regional diabetes organization club Dulce Vida endorsement with the commentary of the club presidents experience with Sucanons use in the treatment of his own type2 diabetes.
Since my only clinical practice is in the US I would be in no position to recommend Sucanon use as that determination is up to the FDA who require evaluation of Sucanon as a drug rather than a neutraceutical.
As for other countries, their own rules and procedures apply and I defer to those authorities and their own interpretation of the clinical studies. I will say though that I am not surprised at the approvals and endorsements as I consider the clinical results of Sucanon quite impressive especially the randomized double blinded placebo controlled study where Sucanon outperformed Glyburide. That confirms the preclinical data where it showed greater response than sulfonylureas and biguanides.
3. In the final analysis though my thoughts, or those of any isolated scientist are meaningless without the ability to reproduce the results and examine the studies for what cold hard science says. As President Reagan eloquently stated "Trust but verify." That is why I have stated my opinions on the published studies and efficacy but encourage DD with verification of the publicly available information on Sucanon studies and for that matter on the sales, history of ROTH and its predecessor companies. For one thing, such a review would thoroughly discredit an argument that Sucanon studies are not credible because the latest Dr to publish a study is a consultant. The latest information just confirms the previous study results which were the basis for approval in Mexico in the first place. Again, the important thing is not my credentials or opinion. I am simply attempting to communicate effectively the efficacy and potential of Sucanon based on publicly available verifiable information
