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.
Way to endorse your 'implied' factual statement with, "JMO". That's convincing. Lol
Btw-if he is getting stock, he is getting paid.
Commom sense should tell you, even more so, the powerful influence of money.
Fred loves the product, he is benefiting by using Anatabloc
Freddy still endorsing because it is a great product
I was referring to the possibility that Star prefers that the product be pulled.
I'm not concerned about the impact on the consumer. However, if Star felt it was a good business strategy to take it off the shelves -- or let it be taken off the shelves without so much as a fight -- it would be a dick move for current users. It would be irresponsible, particularly if they are convinced this compound is superior to anything else out there.
No, my concern is from the standpoint of an investor: How will they proceed given the conflicting regulatory paths? What are the consequences to the 'supplement', as they position and advance it as a viable 'drug'?
And, because of the near-term uncertainties, they need to have clear and competent back-up plans -- whichever way the pendulum swings -- and articulate them (to shareholders) promptly and accordingly, as these issues come to pass.
If that is a joke, I'd love to hear the punchline.
The same product would be the clearest path, to be sure. But I'm curious to know how this will impact the OTC product, particularly as it gets closer to FDA approval. What are the implications of selling the same product in prescription form and in retail stores? How would this complicate partnerships?
Lots of questions to answer, as this entire arrangement is screwy. Also, what else is Roskamp getting out of this collaborative/merged research? Who will be paying them as they get more involved? I'm seeing blurred lines and a long future of dilution.
There is also the potential of a spiteful FDA, 'paying back' Star for past transgressions (anatabloc health claims, etc.) as they enter new phases of drug development, beginning with the IND.
How will study results be announced? If positive, wouldn't that equate to making health claims on an OTC supplement? What about the previous research? If the IND is approved, will they then be able to repost those studies? Will they have to avoid making a direct reference to the currently marketed Anatabloc?
The above, of course, is the bull case. There is always the possibility that anatabine won't replicate earlier results with more rigorous future studies, whether it be due to design/technical issues, or the lack of punch that anatabine shows.
If you are altering the chemistry of the compound, ie., making it more potent -- as would be their intention with the pharma grade compound -- then you are starting over again with something entirely new. I believe your interpretations are, simply, more wishful thinking.
Ps. Whenever a small, fledgeling biotech projects the time frame studies should be completed by, you should probably double it. That is closer to reality.
Clearly, the shares rose yesterday as a result of the puff piece released in the Sarasota newspaper. I'd like to see some follow thru, then meaningful (good) news on the R&D or regulatory front to fill in the gaps and bring back some certainty.
I wonder if they still use the product (or if they ever did regularly). I also wonder that if they drop the charges, would it give STSI boost.
If true, it's all good news. I'm happy for you and them. You should have the doc put together a video of his patients' and his own successes -- that would speak volumes. No sense hiding behind the web with words, it's time to unleash the beast if this is what you and others believe. Show us, don't tell us. YouTube is a great medium to start with. Let's substantiate these claims, or lay off the bull horn.
Thanks for the rite of passage. Let me know when I can witness, confirm, or otherwise vet these stories and authors on the discovery of the holy grail. Until then, it's a suckers vs. predator game Involving ridiculously unbelievable posts, meant entirely to manipulate and influence . It's not much different then the shorts MO: No facts, no balance in viewpoints, exaggerated or baseless predictions and conclusions, no names, no faces -- it's just too easy to play, to watch, to hide and seek, to kick the can and drown the weak.
Seek the Pipi-
I'm taking 10/day. Don't get me wrong, I think there is therapeutic potential here, just not nearly to the degree or extent others would have you believe. I do understand why people mock others for anecdotally ascribing miraculous results -- strictly to anatabine -- in both range and depth of symptomatic relief. Only the most naive and inexperienced would believe that hype. God bless 'em, and God help 'em...they need it. And shame on the perpetrators who desperately exaggerate dramatic improvements to draw In others for the sake of personal financial gain. I believe a majority of these stories are BS.
You got "impossible" and "dream" right, that's for damn sure. One thing I've learned in my nearly 45 years: if it sounds too good to be true, it almost always is not.
There's been a lot of giddiness lately. Must be spring. 'World's greatest anti-inflammatory'- lol. The hits just keep on comin'. You overzealous longs really have me questioning...and doubting...my investment. What an ironic twist on your agenda, wouldn't you say?
For the record, been on Antbloc for almost 3 months, and feel no change. As much as I want to believe, nothing is standing out -- still feel chronic but manageable pain in my neck, shoulders, back, hands, etc. Skin cracking on my dry hands no better. Mentally, the same, maybe worse. This, btw, is my 2nd stint. Last year I used for about 6 months. May have felt subtle improvements, but it could also have been a placebo effect. I felt it did help mildly with smoking cessation, but that may also have been mind over matter. I eat pretty well--lots of fruit and vegatables, not too much meat and moderate dairy. I'm also very active. What do you think Dr Lief? Got any non antbloc ideas?
Question for the board:
Can someone please explain why this is off-topic?
And if they listened to you when it went to .90 (earlier),.80, .70, .60, and into the .50's, you have failed -- at least following that same logic anyway. There is always more to the story...
Despite that, and your silly .10 sticking point, I think your posts are more reality based then a handful of the other regular antbloc cultists. I thank you for that. And I thank myself for buying in the .50's and selling a portion over $1. Everything with a grain of salt, eh?
If anything, your delusions of grandeur (for STSI) and superhuman efficacy (regarding anatabine) serve to damage the reputation of anatabine. My fear is that anatabine is having a harmful effect -- possibly in the brain area. Wouldn't be too surprising, as the brain comprises nicotinic receptors, which anatabine binds too. This, of course, is merely anecdotal. Clearly, however, there is something amiss with your cognitive reasoning, ie., your grip on reality.
Some people look at the glass as half empty; others see it half full. You, my friend, see a geyser emanating from the bottom and overflowing the top. You reach so much sometimes, you make stretch-arm-strong jealous. I appreciate your contributions, but keep the wishful thinking in the vicinity of reasonable, please.
Thanks- Strong language and a well-constructed defense. You never know with the FDA, but I don't think it could have been presented any better. It would be an injustice if they stonewall stsi and anatabine.
Ridiculous, if you are going to put the chemical structure on your label, you should most definitely illustrate it correctly. Common sense tells you that.
Blzzy-I think you have gone off the deep end. There is nothing earth shattering or even tremble-inducing about that piece. And your POV on the FDA? Are you kidding me? Do you realize how much rampant abuse there is in pharma drugs, particularly with CNS and Painkillers? Remember Reagan's 'War on Drugs'? Did wonders for the pharma industry, didn't it? Are you seriously going to suggest that the FDA is just looking out for the poor unsuspecting consumer? Wake the F(da)/PH(arma) up. They are leading the proliferation of drug use in this country--most of which are doing more harm than good.
On the other hand, you are right about the idiotic anecdotal and testimonial dialogue here, it is nauseating, exaggerated, and mostly delusional. The placebo effect is a real condition, and is probably higher when subjects own the stock of the
underlying compound.
As far as Mullan is concerned, don't be naive: it is no different than 98% of any other pharma/researcher/doctor/politican relationship scenerio anywhere else on the planet.
HOW is STSI going ot prove that they are not selling Antbloc Illegally, like the FDA says they are, please tell us all how they will remedy this? Clearly the CEO couldn't and that is why he said NOTHING on the CC!
You beat me to it. Well now, they can see double
Article in Forbes on STSI regarding anatabine and the FDA. Author claims that neither Star nor Rock Creek submitted the IND in 2012:
As such, the FDA has ruled that Anatabloc and CigRx are adulterated with an unapproved drug, particularly since an unidentified firm had filed an Investigational New Drug application (IND) with the FDA in June, 2012. The sponsor isn’t Star Scientific or Rock Creek because they are still only talking about filing an IND as of their shareholder meeting at the end of last year. When I contacted FDA for information on the IND sponsor, media officer Juli Putnam reminded me,
"The FDA cannot comment on any current/pending product applications. The FDA is only able to provide information on approved drug product applications. Any information on an application that has yet to receive an approval or was denied approval belongs to the manufacturer/sponsor developing the drug (21 CFR 314.430)."
I'll leave that to the real strategists and insiders. lol
Thales-If this was a response to my post, I was not referring to you at all. I consider your analysis well thought-out, reasonable, and genuine -- everything those other posts are not. It doesn't matter to me what 'side' you're on, in fact, I prefer that balance. It is the extreme views on both sides that leave something to be desired.
Nobody wants the stock because the company might not have a means of income shortly and their sales have stagnated.
I already told you I don't care about the JW witch-hunt. Whereas that is a fascinating story and side-show, it is largely irrelevant to anatabine's present and future. I just hope the IP is strong and the studies continue to show promise.
As you said before, it isn't as if he was caught with a 12-year-old boy. Nor is he murdering people in a movie theatre for texting, sexting his penis, smoking crack, getting outed for frequenting escort services, murdering his family and committing suicide, etc., etc. It's fine to put him under a microscope, but it helps to look at the big picture also. It's called perspective. He stumbled onto something quite special here with anatabine. Whether it translates into long-term investor success remains to be seen, but you can't objectively take that away from him.
There must be an endearing side to Jonnie that is being suppressed, also. Ultimately, he orchestrated the development of a product intended to help people, and lots of them. I think when this comes to pass, there will be one heck of a book and movie deal; or two, or three. The Legend of JW, coming to a bookstore and theatre near you...lol
All kidding aside, if I was swindled by him, I would have a very different perspective. JW should be rueful. I sympathize for the victims, with one caveat: If I was a victim, I would have to wonder why I was fooled in such a way, and take personal accountability for such naïveté. What did dumBush try to say? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me...
As it relates to the 'politician' and the 'businessman', it appears that two power hungry, money-grubbing scumbags sweet-talked, then swindled and screwed each other, and now everyone else involved have to pick up the pieces. Unfortunately, this kind of thing -- as the ex-Gov atluded to -- is the way that business and politics are done (this is just the fresh exposé du jour). Sad but true, doesn't matter what side of the aisle you're on.
I have now concluded that anyone relying on anything that comes out of a Star/Roskamp relationship is either a pumper or a fool...
It was at this political event in December 2009, prosecutors contend, that then-newly elected Governor Robert McDonnell of Virginia met Jonnie Williams, the man who would destroy his career.
Bravo. Wonder what made him come out, and why mainstream media isn't profiling it? Mainstream medicine, mainstream media, hmmm. They'd probably portray him as a good doctor who went cuckoo. Maybe he did, but what he says makes a lot of sense. It is the essence of what Kevin Trudeau divulged in his book "Natural cures 'they' don't want you to know about", which I just mentioned here last week. Not that I think we (as a massive, integrated and busy society) can completely avoid the crap being pedaled across this country by big business -- and still live 'normal' lives, but we can certainly reduce our intake with a little more awareness and discipline.
That is positive news. Of course, the overzealous bashers won't acknowledge this -- They are too hyped up to be shut down: Yank it off the shelves! They'll be shut down! .10 is coming! I've been warning you! Warning! Overload!, blah, blah, blah. Is it just me, or are they really cranking it up at the fresh new lows? How freakin' cocky and half-brained.
What a joke. The scaremongering is reminiscent of the Republican campaign strategy during the 2008 (and 2012) presidential elections. Weak.
Yes it is, Sonny, and it will remain that way for a while. Until something more than 'equivalent' phII studies comes out; and for a life threatening condition; and showing efficacy or benefit greater than a drug already approved, it means less than nothing. Let's get it recognized as a bonafide drug with the Fda first, before we let the pipe dreams brainwash us...
You're lovesick Sonny, and I empathize. I've been there, only to get my heart crushed. People on the street, or on internet social or investment forums, that say a drug is going to 'change medicine', 99.999% of the time can't be trusted or taken seriously -- don't be that guy.
The basher is right: breakthru therapy/fast track designation and the like are silly assertions. It is fantasy, mostly, for the reasons pointed out in #msg-96048433
Yes. I read that too. There is a for-profit company created by the institute.
Great post! There is a lot of truth in that. Thanks for trying to enlighten the board. A good resource for those who would like to raise their own awareness is Kevin Trudeau's "Natural Cures 'They' Don't Want You To Know About".
LOL! I can see leif blissfully ice skating on M's frozen coastal swamp in florida...during the next ice age!
Good Morning! Here is today's lesson:
Bias is not the same thing as 'truth'.
Bias=Bs. You need to cut thru yours to see his.
"Too much truth"=LOL!
"Proven correct" is a logical fallacy
Summary - whereas the irrational longs have no grasp, your boy has no class.
Ps. Love your sarcasm!
Pss. Not being sarcastic
Thanks - I'll take what I can get. For the record, I came in here criticizing the out-of-touch bulls, and now I'm being pegged as one. All in a week's work, lol. Both sides need a reality check, but that clown needs a good pummeling (in the market of course - maybe he is, thus the vitriol)! I'm okay with bizzy though, he's pretty level-headed.
Well superstar...I'd love to go head to head with you (not), but unfortunately (or fortunately, lol) I have better things to do then trade, post and bash on message boards all day and all night long.
Try this though, take a look at all the biotechs without a product -- I'll even let you omit those currently in phase III testing -- and see how many have market caps over 175 mill., and tell me how many you find. Granted, it won't be a majority, but I think you'll find a few. I'll give you a head start: look at PRAN.
Ps. I may be a sucker on this one, that remains to be seen, but in a liquid market with a modest position ( and break even, currently) , I can deal with that.