Followers | 5 |
Posts | 108 |
Boards Moderated | 0 |
Alias Born | 09/25/2014 |
Twitter Profile: | Temporarily Unavailable |
Follow on Twitter: | Follow @ Temporarily Unavailable |
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
What 2.12s?? I see no roof til 2.20s.
TITXF at this price is a steal. The price has consolidated for the past few months.
going to hit the 2.12s in a bit
ATDF is putting a bottom for us. Might close a couple cents in the green.
Dr. Fowler picked them with a high level of precision and dexterity…then with the tips of the instrument, he precisely sutured them to form the board.
Posilock has a kung-fu grip on TITXF!
Exactly Honeycomb777!
We just need higher volume with a lot of buying pressure to plow through it.
And its apparent to many here on how this rises and then only to get brought down by the same MM, and we all know who is "the ax". (ATDF)
The current volume is at 106.2k, which is above average. The 10-day volume average is 182.6k.
To reach the 2.20ish range, we need at least couple hundred thousand traded today.
It amazes me this trades with that much volume, considering it trades in the pink sheets, and their Bertner Advisors hasn't really promoted this at all.
Here's a direct quote from their press release:
Sherry Bertner, Chief Executive Officer of Bertner Advisors, commented, "Our team is thrilled to partner with Titan Medical. We look forward to working with management to design and execute an investor relations strategy that includes introducing the Titan story to Wall Street."
John Hargrove, Chief Executive Officer of Titan, said, "We believe Bertner Advisors will enable us to extend our investor reach and to build awareness on Wall Street. The Firm is a perfect fit for Titan as we continue to move closer to commercialization of the SPORT™ Surgical System and will enhance a great team, a great technology and a tremendous opportunity."
I provided the URL link at the end of the article.
Anyhow, here it is again:
http://www.gastroendonews.com/ViewArticle.aspx?d=In%2Bthe%2BNews&d_id=187&i=September+2014&i_id=1101&a_id=28184
It looks like this might run to the 2.22 range, no real resistance before this.
Here's another interesting read:
History of Lap Colectomy: An Approach Still Awaiting Widespread Use
by Victoria Stern
In October 1990, an elderly woman came to see Dennis Fowler, MD. She had several critical issues, including severe lung disease and a tumor resting in the middle of her sigmoid colon.
Dr. Fowler, an assistant clinical professor of surgery at the University of Missouri, Kansas City School of Medicine at the time, sat with his patient and her son, discussing treatment options. Dr. Fowler was reluctant to perform surgery because of the woman’s obstructive lung disease. The patient, however, kept insisting that she would rather die from an operation than leave the cancer inside her.
Dr. Fowler told her about a new technique that he and several colleagues had been investigating over the summer. It involved taking out a section of the colon laparoscopically. He had trialed the technique in the pig lab, but the procedure had never, to his knowledge, been attempted in a human patient.
“After numerous discussions, the patient said she wanted this new procedure,” Dr. Fowler said.
On Oct. 19, after receiving three prototypes of a laparoscopic intestinal stapler from U.S. Surgical, Dr. Fowler performed the first laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy. He used one stapler to ligate the mesentery and two to transect the colon intraperitoneally. He then created a small muscle-splitting incision in the left lower quadrant of the abdomen to remove the specimen and completed the anastomosis intracorporeally with a circular stapler.
Dr. Fowler was astonished by the patient’s progress. “Her recovery was amazing considering that she had such serious obstructive lung disease,” Dr. Fowler recalled. “I realized there might be a real benefit to having colon surgery performed laparoscopically.”
Laparoscopic Colectomy Beginnings
As laparoscopic cholecystectomy gained popularity in the late 1980s, physicians started looking for the next home run for minimally invasive surgery (MIS).
“The way we started was very innocent,” said Miami-based general surgeon Moises Jacobs, MD, recalling his first laparoscopic colectomy case in June 1990.
The patient had a particularly “floppy colon,” Dr. Jacobs recalled, and consequently he could mobilize everything using one small incision. Dr. Jacobs and colleagues Harold Goldstein, MD, and Juan Carlos Verdeja, MD, placed four trocars in the abdominal cavity and, using cautery, mobilized the white line of Toldt and the hepatic flexure. Through a small incision in the right lower quadrant, they exteriorized the colon, completing the first laparoscopic-assisted right hemicolectomy. The woman went home four days after surgery.
“We knew there must be something to this new technique,” Dr. Jacobs said.
Dr. Jacobs’ foray into laparoscopy began with cholecystectomy. In December 1989, he and his colleagues began performing laparoscopic cholecystectomies using a two-handed approach.
“We were doing two-handed surgery from the very beginning, and as a result, it was easier for us to transition into more complex surgeries,” Dr. Jacobs said.
When Dr. Jacobs became interested in applying laparoscopic techniques to colon surgery, he worked intensively in the pig lab to hone his skills until completing his first laparoscopic colectomy in June 1990.
After this success, Dr. Jacobs began investigating a variety of techniques for laparoscopic colon surgery with colleagues, including Dr. Verdeja and colorectal surgeon Gustavo Plasencia, MD (Arch Surg 1994;129:206-212; Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:829-833).
“These surgeons knew this was going to be the next big deal,” said Morris Franklin, MD, director of the Texas Endosurgery Institute. “They made significant contributions early on when it really counted.”
Halfway across the country in San Antonio, Dr. Franklin was also exploring laparoscopic surgery. In 1988, Dr. Franklin, alongside urologist William Schuessler, MD, and gynecologist Thierry Vancaillie, MD, started investigating laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer, a demanding procedure they eventually mastered and began teaching to urologists worldwide.
Dr. Franklin saw laparoscopic cholecystectomy as a better teaching tool for laparoscopy. He and Dr. Schuessler began performing up to 15 cholecystectomies a day. They also received institutional review board approval from their hospital to explore new, more advanced laparoscopic techniques, and completed the first distal prostatectomy, splenectomy and one of the first hiatal hernia repairs.
Dr. Franklin soon developed an interest in colon surgery. He and his colleagues spent every weekend for 18 months in the pig lab and any additional free moments developing their skills.
In August 1990, Dr. Franklin performed his first laparoscopic colectomy. Several months later, in April 1991, he did the first completely laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.
“I tried to do it right,” Dr. Franklin said. “I didn’t just jump off a cliff without a parachute. I took the idea to the lab, worked out issues, bounced ideas off colleagues, and consequently have had minimal problems.”
Richard Whelan, MD, recalls Dr. Franklin’s unique abilities. “Dr. Franklin set the bar in the early days and he still does today,” said Dr. Whelan, professor of surgery and chief of surgical oncology at St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital, in New York City. “His skill set is hard to match.”
Perhaps the first person to perform a laparoscopic colectomy was a gynecologist named David Redwine, MD, in the late 1980s, Dr. Franklin noted. Several other general surgeons ventured into laparoscopic colon surgery early as well. In 1990, Garth Ballantyne, MD, started visiting U.S. Surgical on Tuesday afternoons to practice laparoscopic colectomies on pigs with fellow surgeon Patrick Leahy, MD. In late 1990, Dr. Leahy resected a proximal rectal cancer laparoscopically with the EndoGIA (U.S. Surgical) and in February 1991, Dr. Ballantyne did his first laparoscopic colectomy at Yale University. Another general surgeon, Joseph Uddo, MD, performed an entirely laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in July 1991.
Technique Spreads
Dr. Fowler presented on his first laparoscopic sigmoid resection at the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons meeting in April 1991 (Surg Laparosc Endosc 1991;1:183-188).
“I had an overwhelming response from people all over the world,” Dr. Fowler said. “Not many surgeons knew what had been done, and were eager to engage in training programs to learn the procedure.”
As with laparoscopic cholecystectomy, interest in laparoscopic colectomy prompted surgeons to initiate weekend training courses. By November 1991, Dr. Ballantyne had organized courses for U.S. Surgical. Around that time, Ethicon had arranged laparoscopic colectomy workshops, run by Steven Wexner, MD, of Cleveland Clinic, in Weston, Fla. The industry competitors invited many of the same faculty to their courses, and this core group of surgeons soon branched off into U.S. Surgical and Ethicon camps.
Several industry leaders, namely Lee Cohen, head of laparoscopic marketing and technology at U.S. Surgical, in Norwalk, Conn., and Nicholas Valeriani, president of Ethicon Endo-Surgery for many years, supported and pushed the advancement of laparoscopic technology and education. “I often referred to Ms. Cohen as the queen of laparoscopy,” Dr. Ballantyne recalled.
On the global front, Dr. Franklin traveled to Australia, New Zealand and South America in the early 1990s to introduce laparoscopic colectomy to surgeons. Drs. Jacobs and Plasencia also taught some of the first international courses in laparoscopic colectomy.
“International surgeons, such as [Australians] Russell Stitz, MD, and Leslie Nathanson, MD, who went back home after these courses, are now leaders in laparoscopic colorectal surgery,” said Dr. Franklin.
Even with training, however, many surgeons struggled to learn the new techniques. Dr. Ballantyne recalled surgeons’ ambivalence about laparoscopic colectomy. “When we surveyed the attendees [of the U.S. Surgical course], many said, ‘Thanks for a great course, Garth, but you’ve convinced me that laparoscopic colectomy is too hard to do and I’ll never do one.’”
Laparoscopic colectomy is not as easy as laparoscopic cholecystectomy largely because it involves navigating at least two, and often all four, quadrants of the abdomen.
“The majority of surgeons didn’t want to learn laparoscopic colectomy because it was much harder than open surgery,” Dr. Whelan said.
Laparoscopic colectomy was also different from laparoscopic cholecystectomy because patients didn’t demand that their colectomy be completed laparoscopically. “Surgeons, even now, don’t as often feel pressure from patients to do their colectomy laparoscopically,” Dr. Fowler said.
Dr. Jacobs noted that the low volume of laparoscopic colectomy cases by general surgeons in the United States made it harder for surgeons to gain experience.
“I think the low volume of cases slowed down the adoption of laparoscopic colectomy,” he said. But what almost halted its evolution was the concern over tumor recurrence.
Safety Concerns Halt Spread
In 1994, worries about the safety of the procedure emerged. A study by Berends et al in The Lancet reported that three of 14 patients (21%) undergoing laparoscopic colectomy had tumor recurrence at the trocar wound sites (1994;344:58).
Subsequent data have shown unambiguously that when the procedure is performed correctly, there is no increase in tumor recurrence at the incision.
“A surgeon can prevent a port-site recurrence simply by doing good, clean surgery,” said Dr. Franklin, who found that the quality of surgical technique directly influenced the incidence of port-site recurrences (Surg Endosc 2001;15:121-125). “After 3,500 cases, I haven’t had a single tumor implant at the trocar site.”
But even the suggestion that tumors implanted in laparoscopic incisions more often than in open incisions led some major academic institutions and colorectal societies to limit or even ban laparoscopic colectomies.
“At Columbia University, senior surgeons stopped us from doing laparoscopic surgery, and colorectal societies were against laparoscopy because of the lack of data,” said Dr. Whelan. “In addition, many older surgeons felt threatened and didn’t want to see any laparoscopic surgery.”
Surgeons who continued to perform laparoscopic colectomies experienced considerable backlash from the surgical community.
“Several of us were threatened by colleagues,” Dr. Fowler said. “Sometimes action was taken against us to reduce our privileges or turn patients against us.”
The resistance to laparoscopic colectomy reveals a lot about human nature, Dr. Jacobs said. “Some surgeons [who performed open surgery] didn’t want to lose patients and money to this new technique.”
It took 10 years before a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) created a large-scale shift in people’s thinking about laparoscopic colectomy (N Engl J Med 2004;350:2050-2059). The COST (Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy) trial, which began in 1994, involved 48 institutions and 872 patients with colon cancer randomly assigned to open or laparoscopic-assisted colectomy. Recurrence rates in surgical wounds were less than 1% in both groups, and the overall survival rate at three years was almost identical.
Before the study was ultimately published in 2004, a group of laparoscopic surgeons worked diligently to verify the safety of laparoscopic colectomy.
“Despite the resistance, we persisted,” Dr. Jacobs said. “My colleagues and I had been doing laparoscopic colectomy for four years already and didn’t have any bad results.”
In 1991, Dr. Jacobs and his colleagues completed a series of 20 laparoscopic-assisted colon resections (Surg Laparosc Endosc 1991;1:144-150), and independently, Dr. Franklin and his colleagues performed 51 laparoscopic colectomies (Ann Surg 1992;216:703-707). Both studies showed the technique was safe.
Several years later, Dr. Franklin published a five-year prospective randomized trial comparing open and laparoscopic approaches to colon cancer, and found the laparoscopic procedure offered similar oncologic resections and better recovery than open surgery (Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:S35-S46).
In 1996, James Fleshman, MD, Anthony Senagore, MD, and Heidi Nelson, MD, reported retrospective data from the COST study, showing the same 1% rate of tumor recurrence at the wound sites in laparoscopic and open colectomy (Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:S53-S58).
In 1998, Jeffrey Milsom, MD, from Cornell University, in Ithaca, N.Y., performed a prospective RCT comparing laparoscopic and open techniques in 109 patients undergoing bowel resection for colorectal cancers or polyps. Dr. Milsom showed an advantage in the laparoscopic group in terms of recovery time and return to bowel function, and found no port-site cancer recurrences in the laparoscopic group (J Am Coll Surg 1998;187:46-54).
That same year, Antonio M. de Lacy, MD, from Barcelona, Spain, also published a prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic-assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer, revealing similar results, and in 2002, published a follow-up showing a slight survival benefit in the laparoscopic group (Surg Endosc 1998;12:1039-1042; Lancet 2002;359:2224-2229).
These studies not only confirmed that laparoscopic colectomy was as effective as open for curing cancer, but that laparoscopic colectomy conferred greater benefits to patients, including better cosmesis, fewer wound infections, less inflammatory response, decreased postoperative pain and quicker return to normal activities.
“The only reason laparoscopic colectomy was eventually accepted was because of these trials,” Dr. Whelan said.
Current Landscape
Despite compelling evidence of a benefit, many surgeons still do not offer laparoscopic colectomy to patients. According to Drs. Whelan and Franklin, less than 30% of all colectomies are performed laparoscopically.
Over the next decade, as more surgical residents are trained in MIS techniques, laparoscopic colectomy may become more standard.
“Surgical residents are being exposed to laparoscopic colectomy, so the hope is that much of the future of resectional colorectal surgery will be minimally invasive,” Dr. Fowler said.
Still, making laparoscopic methods more widespread continues to be a challenge. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS), developed by Drs. Ballantyne and Leahy in 1993, represented one of the first attempts to bridge the gap between open and laparoscopic techniques. With HALS, surgeons make a slightly larger incision compared with laparoscopic surgery, but studies show that patients experience many of the same benefits (Dis Colon Rectum 2008;51:818-826).
“HALS is an enabling technology for colorectal surgery,” Ms. Cohen said. “The procedure becomes much easier to perform when surgeons can insert their hand in the belly to feel the anatomy and tumor site, just like they do in an open case.”
Surgical robotics is another MIS-enabling technology. The da Vinci Robot, for instance, is designed to restore sensory perception and give surgeons more intuitive control of their instruments. However, according to Dr. Wexner, the expense of the technology has limited its widespread use, and studies have consistently failed to show that the robot is superior to laparoscopy despite significantly more time and expense.
“I think many surgeons are struggling with these laparoscopic techniques, which is why they use tools such as HALS and robotics,” Dr. Franklin said. “However, I don’t think these tools are the answer. Mastering difficult laparoscopic techniques is about constant exposure, hard work and revision. I continue to modify my technique even today.”
Reflecting on the past 25 years of surgery, Dr. Jacobs recalls how laparoscopy gave him a new perspective on his profession. “I never wanted to be the first at anything, but the benefits of laparoscopy became obvious when we saw how we helped patients,” he said. “It was truly exciting to be part of a change that revolutionized surgery.”
http://www.gastroendonews.com/ViewArticle.aspx?d=In%2Bthe%2BNews&d_id=187&i=September+2014&i_id=1101&a_id=28184
To be honest, I don't think, Hargrove, Rayman, Randall, and Fowler did not foresee this MM manipulation — this area is not their speciality. Most folks don't understand the intricacies of market makers. It's hot a mess. Even my head spins thinking about it, and I've been trading since I was 19 years old, and now I'm a forty year old fart, and I'm still trying to decipher this today.
The MMs merely short sells into the buying and attempts to take the stock down in an effort to "shake out" the weak. MM's entice sellers; Run the stock up with a "tight spread" in a fast market, then "open" up the spread to slow down the buying interest. After it has "cooled off" for a little while lower the offer below the last trade right after a small piece trades on the offer then tighten the spread so that the sellers feel they can take a "quick profit" by "hitting the bid" on the tight spread.
Once the selling starts the MM's will walk it down quickly by only making small prints on the way down with the tight spread. Another way is by running the stock up in the morning, averaging up their short then use the above technique to walk it down in the afternoon. And doing this for several days, it will demoralize the buyers. The volume will dry up and the sellers will materialize thinking that the game or run is over.
Most MM's don't have a clue as to the value of a company until they get trapped. If the company has solid fundementals and a bright future. Then the stock will do very well. And the activity that caused the situation will prove to even help the future stock activity because it created an audience.
Keep in mind the greatest way the market makers make their biggest profits is by a using an ingenious legal stock trading method called SHORT SELLING. And just so you know, ATDF has been "boxing" their damn trades, they have positioned themselves on both the ask and the bid.
Unfortunately, Pink Sheets LLC is not registered with the SEC as a stock exchange, nor does the SEC regulate its activities. Additionally, they do not require the companies to stay current in their financial statements with SEC, which this alone scares off potential investors.
We need above average volume with heavy buying pressure to bust through those "market maker sell walls" that they put up. And just the the fact, that TITXF shares trade on Pink Sheets and are unregulated makes some investors wary. This is why the uplist on US markets is so important.
The best way to invest in TITXF is to know your market, the company and the history of the stock market as a whole — the ups and downs that are temporary glitches and the long-term adjustments dictated by macro economic trends.
Also, it's imperative as a TITXF investor, that you do your own due diligence, like knowing the company's management (extremely important), history, and future prospects. The MMs will eventually lose ground with the influx of buy orders — their time will come.
Now ATDF has 40k on the ASK at 2.15. That's a big wall.
ATDF is up to their shit again — 20k at 2.15 on the ASK...then it has 10k at 2.07 on the BID.
Considering the market has taken a major hit on the chin, and TITXF hasn't dropped is a pretty good indication the range here is pretty tight with a solid base.
These words you mentioned below will haunt you 16 months from now:
"There will be plenty more pain for this stock for the next 16 months"
It's true what they say, "fear and greed drive the market" You Ryan, are on the fear side and I'm on the greedy side when it comes TITXF. Lets look back 16 months from now and count our chips, and see who comes up ahead.
Remember, the key is being in the stock before these catalyst below become reality:
• Uplist
• Design Freeze
• Patent Approval
• Initiate outside US approval
• Outside US initial commercial launch
• FDA 510k clearance
• Initiation of process to shift production to high volume manufacturing partner
This will run, don't get discourage by the MMs. I'm more worried about the market as a whole, and geopolitical issues. Now we have Ebola that we have to be concerned about, Planet Of The Apes…here we come. (Just kidding). Ebola could hurt consumer spending, if they can't control it — people will not want to congregate in high public dense areas.
Exactly Slic Mic, this is the real McCoy! People need to read between the lines, and use that to their advantage. I'm looking to up my current holdings, but this time in my IRA account for the long haul, I'm honestly thinking of putting half of my IRA liquidity into TITXF…when the odds are in your favor you have to up the stakes, its what separates the big boys from the little ones.
There's just too many catalyst coming down the road that will snap this stock.
In the meantime, we need the market to settle down and behave, so I can place another limit buy order.
Good luck to all!
Just an observation from my end:
TITXF volume at times picks up on the Pinkies, which amazes me considering there is no promoting on this hidden gem. Then who is buying on high volume days? Folks in the medical field? Savvy medical investors? Insider friends? Who is buying, is the question?
Just watch when it uplist and trades on the Nasdaq (I don't want them on AMEX). Volume will snow ball.
I would like them to uplist first, then meet milestones — that would send this stock into the double digits. On the other hand, I strongly believe hitting milestones while trading in the pink sheets would have a less of impact on the share price.
Yes, some have revenues, but Titan has key milestones that will be met, and that will equate to revenue down the road. No question about that. What's just as important, is the credibility TITXF holds, they have the backing from top doctors and hospitals in the nation. Their management/board members are key players in the industry — if they thought this was not a game changer and had no market chance, then most likely they would NOT associate themselves with Titan on the fear of their reputation being tarnished. But clearly they know what they have…a groundbreaking medical technology that will forever change the medical field.
Interesting read, I don't know if you folks read this already. Here you go:
Future of Minimally Invasive Surgery: Recollections and Predictions
In the mid-1990s, Robert Sewell, MD, had only performed about half a dozen inguinal hernia repairs laparoscopically when he confronted a patient with a bilateral inguinal hernia. Dr. Sewell, a general surgeon at the Master Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery in Southlake, Texas, began the operation with the intent of doing both sides laparoscopically. But two hours into the procedure, after Dr. Sewell had repaired one side laparoscopically, he made the executive decision to perform the other side open.
“I didn’t want to keep the patient in the OR for four hours,” Dr. Sewell recalled.
Dr. Sewell did what he thought was best for his patient, but incidentally performing both procedures on one patient spoke volumes about the difference between the two. When the patient woke up, he complained of excruciating pain on one side of his body—the open repair side—but felt minimal pain on the other—laparoscopic—side: a striking outcome, which, for Dr. Sewell, highlighted the benefits of laparoscopy.
Reflecting on the early days of laparoscopic colectomy, Dennis Fowler, MD, recalled a particularly notable moment when a surgical colleague who had aggressively opposed the minimally invasive procedure came to Dr. Fowler because he needed a colectomy and wanted Dr. Fowler to be his surgeon.
Dr. Fowler agreed, asking his colleague if he wanted the procedure performed open, but to Dr. Fowler's surprise, his colleague responded: “No, I’d like you to do it laparoscopically.”
Dr. Fowler performed the colectomy laparoscopically. The patient went home two days later. Seventeen days after the procedure, the patient performed a full day of surgery.
“My colleague told me he was completely convinced he would not have recovered like that if I had done the procedure open,” Dr. Fowler said. “After this personal experience, he completely changed his tune. He learned to do laparoscopic colectomy and offered the procedure to all of his patients.”
Despite its benefits in many cases, laparoscopic surgery has met with considerable controversy throughout its history, and the spread of various laparoscopic techniques has occurred unevenly over the last three decades. For instance, the adoption rate of laparoscopic colectomy in the United States depends heavily on the surgeon and institution. Jeffrey Milsom’s group at New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center performs about 80% to 85% of colectomies laparoscopically and surgeons at the Lahey Clinic in Massachusetts focus solely on MIS colorectal techniques, but many other surgeons and institutions across the United States continue to offer open colectomy almost exclusively.
Mastering minimally invasive techniques can be difficult, and the learning curve steep. “Although some surgeons learn the more complex techniques relatively easily, others find it more challenging and don’t do them,” Dr. Fowler said. “For surgeons to learn these techniques, they need strong visual-spatial aptitude.”
Additionally, Dr. Fowler noted, “ much of the technology we have, even now, is still antiquated.” For instance, surgeons still use a 110-year-old glass telescope for imaging, and operate off a video screen, which requires translating a two-dimensional image into a three-dimensional operating space.
Now with the emergence of other minimally invasive techniques—such as single incision laparoscopy and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)—the future of minimally invasive surgery has become more complex.
“As MIS splinters into different camps, with benefits becoming more and more nuanced, it will be harder to come up with firm recommendations,” said Richard Whelan, MD, professor of surgery and chief of surgical oncology at St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital in New York City. “Each method has components that are very good, but I think at this point it will be hard to prove that any one of these newer methods is better than laparoscopic surgery, especially given that the associated costs can be prohibitive.”
Anthony N. Kalloo, MD, agreed that indeed there can be a steep learning curve for surgeons who want to adopt MIS techniques, and that the technological advances required to make NOTES more mainstream pose further challenges to its spread. “With NOTES, we would want a suturing device that can pass through an endoscope,” said Dr. Kalloo, The Moses and Helen Golden Paulson Professor of Gastroenterology and director in the Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore. “Once that’s realized, it will be a huge leap for NOTES, as the development of NOTES goes hand in hand with technological development.”
Reflecting on the next two decades of surgery, Dr. Kalloo sees a future unfolding in which procedures require fewer and fewer incisions.“I foresee a future in which research has moved towards microrobotics, where we are operating in the abdomen using a very small wire,” said Dr. Kalloo, who has already been working with a team, using needles and magnets in place of an additional abdominal port.
Looking into the distant future, Moises Jacobs, MD, a general surgeon in Miami and laparoscopic pioneer, sees an intriguing prospect. “Surgery may eventually become obsolete as our techniques continue to evolve.” Dr. Jacobs said. “That may sound like science fiction now, but I hope that happens.”
http://www.generalsurgerynews.com/ViewArticle.aspx?d=The%2BScope&d_id=549&i=March+2012&i_id=844&a_id=28082&tab=RecentComments
I wish too Honeycomb777, but the TSX requirements and standards are loose compared to the counterparts — there's charts online that compare the requirements between exchanges.
TSX is still the minor leagues, compared to the big boards. TITXF will make their US major league debut soon. And trust me, TITXF is clearly a home run.
Right now, TITXF it's looking like a "Honeycomb hideout" The market is dragging this gem.
Unfortunately, US exchange uplisting isn't automatic. After TITXF meets all of the requirements for an uplisting, including financial requirements, corporate governance requirements and share price, it is still up to Nasdaq or Amex to give final approval. Sometimes, this happens almost immediately (like SCOK) and other times, it can take a number of weeks (like SBAY). As you can see, timing on uplistings is uncertain, timing depends entirely on Nasdaq approval, and it pays to be patient. Trust me. Because I missed out on the massive Sinocoking run and a few others, and many more. I typically try to get in early and then be patient rather than waiting until it is too late. Many should with TITXF, this is a home run.
Check this out, this will get your juices pumping — in the case of Sinocoking, the stock ran from $12 pre-uplist to $18 in 2 days, and subsequently ran as high as $53.70 within a few short weeks. In the case of Puda and Agritech, both jumped by around 20% on the day their uplisting was announced even though it was widely known that the uplisting was coming. Puda uplisted at around $5 and now trades at over $11. China Agritech uplisted at a split-adjusted price of $6 and now trades at $23, having reached a high over $30.
The US uplisting will be profitable for us, it's such a low-risk strategy because TITXF isn't bid up to fair value well in advance of the uplisting, and the reason is that many institutional investors are specifically prohibited by their charters from investing in OTC stocks. In addition, many institutions have guidelines about minimum share prices and won't invest in low-priced stocks. As soon as the uplist happens, the institutional money will flow in driving both Titan price and volume to fair market levels. This is when Bertner Advisors should run the press releases, and flood the market.
And we have the key milestones that are just around the corner!
They are controlling the show here, just look at bid and ask blocks. Now they have a small block of 6,000k at 2.20 on the bid, only to flip for a couple of cents. Bastards, this needs to run.
They had a 50k sell block sitting at 2.30 the other day. And at times, they break up the large orders, and piece meal them at smaller sizes. Dirty tricks, I'm telling you.
These MMs at http://www.atdesk.com are bringing TITXF share price down with their damn sell orders. I've been on Level 2 and these bozos are always on the ASK doing their crap.
Here is their contact info:
Automated Trading Desk
11 eWall Street
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
(843) 789-2000
The DTC eligibility will increase their liquidity once they achieve their uplist (NYSE, the AMEX or NASDAQ). Many brokers will not trade it if they art not DTC eligible. TITXF needs to be on the big boards — I imagine Titan will achieve this in the near term. TITXF will NOT be trading in the 2's when they announce the uplist.
Not to mention, if a reorganization such as a merger or tender offer occurs, DTC handles the transfer of cash and stock to the appropriate investment bank or broker/dealer, which then passes it on to their investors.
Looking to add, if it breaks the year high of 2.57 on higher volume. This technical break out could come quick and couple that, with a uplist on the US exchange, and the stock could go parabolic. The stock is clearly under the radar of most.
The Titan management and board is top notch, no doubt about it — they wouldn't peg their name to the name Titan if they believed the SPORT had no market chance. Get it people!
Stocks like Titan are hard to come by, I'm looking to make a lot of money on this stock. Too many upcoming news catalyst to sell at these ridiculously low levels.
2.30 level at 56,300 is a big wall at the ATDF exchange, it's going take a lot of buying pressure to bring this down. Look for this, if it breaks
TITXF — management and directors
The management and directors they hold are top notch in the industry. This has buyout written all over. Their market share will balloon, once they hit their forecasted milestones, which in return, would yield a higher buyout price. The stock will get uplisted, just don't know when.
The stock is considerably undervalued.