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.
You say "can not be denied", but first off, "can not" should be "cannot" so right out of the gate there should be suspicion as to the so-called facts. As best I can see all of these 'facts' are not facts at all. I deny them all.
Your post is absolute nonsense!
The false claim of stock and health fraud has been repeated many times, but saying it over and over will not make it come true.
Sucanon is not banned by the FDA. It's just not approved by the FDA. There is nothing wrong comparing Sucanon to an FDA approved drug such as Metformin because both drugs have very similar performance reducing blood sugar levels, but Sucanon has no side effects and it is not hard on the kidneys.
As for calling Sucanon snake oil from Dried root radix Trichosanthes etc, please remember that Metformin was originally made from the Lilac plant. Many drugs are plant based and there is nothing wrong with this.
Readers should always consider the source of information posted and look for supporting details and not just believe general and unsupported claims.
Certainly I do not agree in the least. My warnings are about your posts and not about the company.
SUPER DUPER ULRA EXREME WARNINGS.
.....DO not believe information that is unverifyable.
.....Do not believe the false claim that the FDA banned Sucanon.
.....Do not believe general propaganda and misinformation.
Do your own research and invest accordingly.
The false claim of stock and health fraud has been repeated many times, but saying it over and over will not make it true.
Sucanon is not banned by the FDA. It's just not approved by the FDA. There is nothing wrong comparing Sucanon to an FDA approved drug such as Metformin because both drugs have very similar performance reducing blood sugar levels, but Sucanon has no side effects and it is not hard on the kidneys.
As for calling Sucanon snake oil from Dried root radix Trichosanthes etc, please remember that Metformin was originally made from the Lilac plant. Many drugs are plant based and there is nothing wrong with this.
Readers should always consider the source of information posted and look for supporting details and not just believe general and unsupported claims.
You say "None of the previous post is accurate", but quite to the contrary, sweetlou's post #11171 is 100% accurate.
Sorry, but no dice. Length of time is not proof.
You say "Those are all things proven false", but you present no evidence concernng ABC hospital trial results or the India approval. These 2 key items hang in the balance and are in play.
Jayyy, with all due respect, you are focusing on the wrong things. The big prizes are India approval and ABC hospital test results where Sucanon goes head to head against Metformin.
This is why investors own Roth. Metformin is the number one type 2 diabetes drug and yet is has significant side effects such as it’s hard on kidney function. Sucanon does not have this issue and yet has similar blood sugar reducing benefit - maybe a little less, but maybe a little more. Either way, the no side effect benefit would make Sucanon a clear winner.
The big two pieces of news everyone is waiting on is 1) the results of ABC hospital trials and 2) approval of India government. Either one of these would be worth .05 on share price in my opinion.
A quick comparison of Sucanon vs Metformin as to which reduces blood sugar more. This is pretty unscientific but it looks like results should be very similar based on a "head-to-head" competition.
Metformin:
http://www.diabetesnet.com/about-diabetes/diabetes-medications/metformin
The 3rd paragraph says:
Metformin lowers fasting blood glucose levels by an average of 25% (17 to 37%), postprandial blood glucose up to 44.5%, and the A1c by an average of 1.5% (0.8 to 3.1%).
Sucanon:
http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_summary.asp
Clinical studies have shown that Sucanon® reduces blood sugar readings by about 25% - 30% and brings high blood sugar back into the normal range (non-fasting blood sugar is above 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter) or fasting blood sugar is above 126 mg/dL).
More test info: http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_results.asp
Looks like it should be a really close competition, but even if Sucanon comes in a little worse than Metformin, Sucanon has no negative side effects.
Roth is now current with OTC Markets. Stop is now removed.
As for the State of Nevada taxes/fees, as has been said many times before, there is no issue here and the NV website is just not up to date. Don't takemy word for it - a call to NV will confirm it.
No, the company is not insolvent and is not banned by the FDA. Roth is in good standing with NV.
Sweetlou, you are exactly 100% correct!
Jayyy is proven incorrect on the stop on trading as 10,000 shares were just traded this morning.
FDA never banned Sucanon.
I will report when the yield sign is removed.
This is why investors own Roth. Metformin is the number one type 2 diabetes drug and yet is has significant side effects such as it’s hard on kidney function. Sucanon does not have this issue and yet has similar blood sugar reducing benefit - maybe a little less, but maybe a little more. Either way, the no side effect benefit would make Sucanon a clear winner.
The big two pieces of news everyone is waiting on is 1) the results of ABC hospital trials and 2) approval of India government. Either one of these would be worth .05 on share price in my opinion.
A quick comparison of Sucanon vs Metformin as to which reduces blood sugar more. This is pretty unscientific but it looks like results should be very similar based on a "head-to-head" competition.
Metformin:
http://www.diabetesnet.com/about-diabetes/diabetes-medications/metformin
The 3rd paragraph says:
Metformin lowers fasting blood glucose levels by an average of 25% (17 to 37%), postprandial blood glucose up to 44.5%, and the A1c by an average of 1.5% (0.8 to 3.1%).
Sucanon:
http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_summary.asp
Clinical studies have shown that Sucanon® reduces blood sugar readings by about 25% - 30% and brings high blood sugar back into the normal range (non-fasting blood sugar is above 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter) or fasting blood sugar is above 126 mg/dL).
More test info: http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_results.asp
Looks like it should be a really close competition, but even if Sucanon comes in a little worse than Metformin, Sucanon has no negative side effects.
No Sucanon is not banned.
This is why investors own Roth. Metformin is the number one type 2 diabetes drug and yet is has significant side effects such as it’s hard on kidney function. Sucanon does not have this issue and yet has similar blood sugar reducing benefit - maybe a little less, but maybe a little more. Either way, the no side effect benefit would make Sucanon a clear winner.
The big two pieces of news everyone is waiting on is 1) the results of ABC hospital trials and 2) approval of India government. Either one of these would be worth .05 on share price in my opinion.
A quick comparison of Sucanon vs Metformin as to which reduces blood sugar more. This is pretty unscientific but it looks like results should be very similar based on a "head-to-head" competition.
Metformin:
http://www.diabetesnet.com/about-diabetes/diabetes-medications/metformin
The 3rd paragraph says:
Metformin lowers fasting blood glucose levels by an average of 25% (17 to 37%), postprandial blood glucose up to 44.5%, and the A1c by an average of 1.5% (0.8 to 3.1%).
Sucanon:
http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_summary.asp
Clinical studies have shown that Sucanon® reduces blood sugar readings by about 25% - 30% and brings high blood sugar back into the normal range (non-fasting blood sugar is above 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter) or fasting blood sugar is above 126 mg/dL).
More test info: http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_results.asp
Looks like it should be a really close competition, but even if Sucanon comes in a little worse than Metformin, Sucanon has no negative side effects.
This is why investors own Roth. Metformin is the number one type 2 diabetes drug and yet is has significant side effects such as it’s hard on kidney function. Sucanon does not have this issue and yet has similar blood sugar reducing benefit - maybe a little less, but maybe a little more. Either way, the no side effect benefit would make Sucanon a clear winner.
The big two pieces of news everyone is waiting on is 1) the results of ABC hospital trials and 2) approval of India government. Either one of these would be worth .05 on share price in my opinion.
A quick comparison of Sucanon vs Metformin as to which reduces blood sugar more. This is pretty unscientific but it looks like results should be very similar based on a "head-to-head" competition.
Metformin:
http://www.diabetesnet.com/about-diabetes/diabetes-medications/metformin
The 3rd paragraph says:
Metformin lowers fasting blood glucose levels by an average of 25% (17 to 37%), postprandial blood glucose up to 44.5%, and the A1c by an average of 1.5% (0.8 to 3.1%).
Sucanon:
http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_summary.asp
Clinical studies have shown that Sucanon® reduces blood sugar readings by about 25% - 30% and brings high blood sugar back into the normal range (non-fasting blood sugar is above 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter) or fasting blood sugar is above 126 mg/dL).
More test info: http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_results.asp
Looks like it should be a really close competition, but even if Sucanon comes in a little worse than Metformin, Sucanon has no negative side effects.
Reality is that bid and ask are fairly meaningless. Its the actual buy/sell price and quantity that are significant.
For example, the small quantity trade of 1000 shares last Friday just seconds before the closing bell is meaningless. This was $3.50 and is not significant.
You say "Its good the SEC has been notified", but where do we "see" this? Provide a link please (if there is one).
Not telling the whole story is incomplete. When testifying on the witness stand a person promises "to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God".
The whole truth is that Roth applied for over-the-counter sales as a nutritional supplement. This application was not approved (denied) because Sucanon was determined to be a drug. The FDA suggested applying for approval as a drug (through the Compliance Department of the FDA) which Roth chose not to do.
Sucanon was never banned. Sucanon was never marketed or sold in the US. Sucanon itself was never denied.
This is where you are wrong and it shows the need to pay close attention to what you read.
Roth applied for approval as a nutritional supplement, not for approval as a drug.
By God, please go back and reread very carefully and completely.
The FDA did not approve (or deny) Sucanon as a drug BECAUSE Roth did not apply for approval as a drug.
Yes, Metformin is FDA approved and Sucanon is not. That being said, test results for Sucanon indicate similar blood sugar lowering but with no side effects.
Generally the word "banned" would be applied to a product that is know to be harmful or which has been marketed illegally. Sucanon is not either of these - it has never been marketed in the US and there is nothing harmful about the product. So I maintain that the word "banned" is not a proper description.
So, what would Sucanon be worth if it was FDA approved? How about approval in India - what would that be worth? How about ABC Mexico City positive clinical trial results? What would that be worth? This is why investors own Roth.
Your guess is as good as mine. Both pieces of news are way overdue and cold be any time now.
This is why investors own Roth. Metformin is the number one type 2 diabetes drug and yet is has significant side effects such as it’s hard on kidney function. Sucanon does not have this issue and yet has similar blood sugar reducing benefit - maybe a little less, but maybe a little more. Either way, the no side effect benefit would make Sucanon a clear winner.
The big two pieces of news everyone is waiting on is 1) the results of ABC hospital trials and 2) approval of India government. Either one of these would be worth .05 on share price in my opinion.
==============================================================================================================
A quick comparison of Sucanon vs Metformin as to which reduces blood sugar more. This is pretty unscientific but it looks like results should be very similar based on a "head-to-head" competition.
Metformin:
http://www.diabetesnet.com/about-diabetes/diabetes-medications/metformin
The 3rd paragraph says:
Metformin lowers fasting blood glucose levels by an average of 25% (17 to 37%), postprandial blood glucose up to 44.5%, and the A1c by an average of 1.5% (0.8 to 3.1%).
Sucanon:
http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_summary.asp
Clinical studies have shown that Sucanon® reduces blood sugar readings by about 25% - 30% and brings high blood sugar back into the normal range (non-fasting blood sugar is above 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter) or fasting blood sugar is above 126 mg/dL).
More test info: http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_results.asp
Looks like it should be a really close competition, but even if Sucanon comes in a little worse than Metformin, Sucanon has no negative side effects.
By God!.....revise that to $900
I certainly do not agree! Sucanon was not banned or denied. You may speak for yourself, but not for me.
As for contacting FDA compliance, it is clear to anyone who has mastery of the Kings English that this is optional for approval as a drug and not mandatory. Be Good.
It is interesting that whenever I point out that contacting FDA Compliance Department is only for obtaining approval as a drug my statement is never addressed or challenged. I take this to mean inplicit agreement.
Again, as I have said many times before, contacting the Office of Comliance is not a requirement, but only if Roth wanted to get FDA approval.
By God!......buy Roth!
A quick comparison of Sucanon vs Metformin as to which reduces blood sugar more. This is pretty unscientific but it looks like results should be very similar based on a "head-to-head" competition.
Metformin:
http://www.diabetesnet.com/about-diabetes/diabetes-medications/metformin
The 3rd paragraph says:
Metformin lowers fasting blood glucose levels by an average of 25% (17 to 37%), postprandial blood glucose up to 44.5%, and the A1c by an average of 1.5% (0.8 to 3.1%).
Sucanon:
http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_summary.asp
Clinical studies have shown that Sucanon® reduces blood sugar readings by about 25% - 30% and brings high blood sugar back into the normal range (non-fasting blood sugar is above 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter) or fasting blood sugar is above 126 mg/dL).
More test info: http://www.pharmaroth.com/clinical_results.asp
Looks like it should be a really close competition, but even if Sucanon comes in a little worse than Metformin, Sucanon has no negative side effects.
Roth to Go Big soon.
Roth is a Good Buy.
The subject has shifted from "contact compliance" to something else without any defense. Its like the old BG's song "I started a joke that got the whole world laughing" and then "I started to cry that got the whole world laughing. Yes, its just like the BGs.
This "contact compliance" wolf cry is out of context. If one reads the FDA letter this "contact compliance" is if Roth wished to pursue approval as a drug. Roth did not choose to do so making this a moot arguement.
I would be interested in exactly who notified the SEC and about what. I seriously doubt that the SEC was notified by anyone about anything.
Since no link was posted nobody can double check the information you posted.
Here is some actual information with a link, phone number and email address so anybody can contact the NV secretary of state and get the information straight from the horse's mouth:
http://nvsos.gov/sos/sos-information/contact-us
Secretary of State
Nevada State Capitol Building
101 North Carson Street, Suite 3
Carson City, NV 89701
Phone: 775-684-5708
FAX: 775-684-5725*
Email: sosmail@sos.nv.gov
You say "Nice try--anyone can go the SOS of Nevada and see that this insolvent fraud is REVOKED".
Anyone can also call and find out that the website is out of date and that Roth is currect with NV.
There are only two problems with your post:
1) This is a non-issue. Roth owes no money to Nevada.
2) The wesite is just not up to date.
You say "just checked again today" but how did you check?
If you just checked the website its not up to date.
If you call you will get the latest up to date information.
So I presume links to press releases were forwarded to the SEC and you expect them to act on that? Not likely. If there is a formal letter or email sent to the SEC then lets see it.
I don't believe that Roth ever committed any fraud and I also don't believe anyone has ever contacted the SEC. There is no evidence of either.
Please tell everyone in a nice letter format how investers have been screwed so that we can forward to the SEC. I do not see any evidence of being screwed, but if you have inside information that I do not have then please present it to everyone.
Looking up the name of the SEC officeis easy. Nobody should give up any personal information, but the body of the email or letter can be posted with all contact iformation redacted.
Remember that redacting is easy.
I can only conclude that the SEC has never been contacted by anyone concerning Roth. Am I supposed to complain that I am in the black? Really!
Please tell me exactly what I should tell the SEC. If I knew what has already been sent to the SEC I could use that as a starting point. Surely I can't tell them that my stock is worth more than I paid for it, but even of it was worth less than I paid this is not grounds for a complaint. I need more and the details. Time to make the case.
Please post what has been told to the SEC so far, if in fact anything has been sent to the SEC.