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.
>... this is a major component of the patient
pool that GTC/LFB hope to address with their FVIIa program.<
Just trying to understand any possible ramifications of this:
Does this mean that the field just got a bit more crowded, difficult and competitive for GTC?
Totally OT: Cloning...
If you'd have left off the "loving public" part perhaps you might have passed for a person genuinely concerned for another person's (not a politician, just a man) life or death struggle.
A Possible Photo From The Upcoming Meeting:
Cuts in science funding fuel U.S. regression
"Our nation is rapidly becoming the "muscle" of the planet, while Europe is regaining its status as the "brains." This regression will continue as long as we proceed to cut funding for fundamental scientific research while spending hundreds of billions of dollars on war."
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2008/05/21/meyer21.ART_ART_05-21-08_A11_9RA8NBN.html?sid=101
Wednesday, May 21, 2008 3:08 AM
By Ed Meyer
Construction on the world's most powerful atom-smasher began beneath the plains of Texas in 1991. The Superconducting Super Collider would be housed in a tunnel 54 miles in circumference and was expected to reveal many secrets relevant to the nature of the universe by recreating the conditions immediately after the "Big Bang." In 1993, after $2 billion had been spent on buildings and digging 15 miles of the huge tunnel, Congress scrapped the project.
A European scientific group known as CERN (a French acronym for the European Council for Nuclear Research) will soon pick up where the United States left off when it flips the switch on its own version of the SSC: the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The European machine is 17 miles in circumference, about 300 feet below the surface of the earth and spans the countries of France and Switzerland.
It collides counter-rotating beams of protons together and detects the showers of subatomic particles with precision detectors that are seven stories high. The instrument could arguably be considered the magnum opus of humanity, the crowning achievement of our species.
The protons make 11,245 laps around the 17-mile beam tube each second. Although the proton beam has a mass of only one ten-thousandth the mass of a grain of sand, it is moving so close to the speed of light that it has the energy of a 30,000-pound fighter jet moving at 500 mph. The control of the proton beam is so precise that the tube through which they travel is less than 3 inches in diameter.
Europe's new collider also provides strong evidence that the U.S. position as the world's leader in fundamental scientific research was a temporary one. A little reflection reveals that the honor probably never really belonged to us in the first place.
The only reason the United States enjoyed a run as the center for scientific research is that Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini chased the great scientists out of Europe with their misanthropic and militaristic policies. From 1933 to 1941, about 100 top physicists emigrated from Europe to the United States. These physicists were not only instrumental in the success of the Manhattan Project, they stayed in the U.S. and filled positions at universities around the country. They produced thousands of Ph.D. physicists and drew more of Europe's top students for decades to come.
A look at the home countries of scientists who were awarded Nobel Prizes in physics is compelling evidence in support of this idea.
Before 1935, European scientists dominated the Nobel Prize in physics. Scientists in the U.S. were awarded a total of two and a half Nobel Prizes before 1935. Virtually all the rest went to Europeans -- 10 were from Germany, and the rest were from France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Austria, Italy, Sweden, Switzerland and one from India. From 1936 on, after the exodus of top scientists from Europe, the United States won all or part of the Nobel Prize in physics in 45 of the 69 years it was awarded.
Enrico Fermi immigrated to the U.S. in 1938 upon being awarded the Nobel Prize in physics. He elevated the physics department at the University of Chicago to international status by producing seven Nobel Prize winners among his students. Hans Bethe jump-started Cornell's physics department, winning a Nobel Prize in physics in 1967. Felix Bloch left Germany upon Hitler's ascent to power and took a position at Stanford University in California, where he won the Nobel Prize for developing magnetic resonance imaging in 1952.
Emilio Segrè, an Italian Jew, was instrumental in elevating the physics department of University of California at Berkeley to the lofty status it now enjoys with his nuclear research. He won the Nobel Prize in physics in 1959. Hungarian mathematician John von Neumann and Albert Einstein were founding members of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton.
The positive effect that this bounty of top scientists from Europe had on American science is fading fast. While many foreign students still come to the United States for college and graduate school, many are now choosing to return to their home countries rather than staying in the U.S.
Our nation is rapidly becoming the "muscle" of the planet, while Europe is regaining its status as the "brains." This regression will continue as long as we proceed to cut funding for fundamental scientific research while spending hundreds of billions of dollars on war.
The federal budget for fiscal year 2008 cut $94 million in funding for high energy physics, and layoffs are expected at key national laboratories. In order to maintain our status as a "world leader," we have to value fundamental scientific research. We obviously can't rely on another mass influx of top foreign scientists like the one that occurred in the 1930s.
Ed Meyer is an assistant professor of physics at Baldwin-Wallace College in Berea, Ohio.
Semi-OT:Cuts in science funding fuel U.S. regression
"Our nation is rapidly becoming the "muscle" of the planet, while Europe is regaining its status as the "brains." This regression will continue as long as we proceed to cut funding for fundamental scientific research while spending hundreds of billions of dollars on war."
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2008/05/21/meyer21.ART_ART_05-21-08_A11_9RA8NBN.html?sid=101
Wednesday, May 21, 2008 3:08 AM
By Ed Meyer
Construction on the world's most powerful atom-smasher began beneath the plains of Texas in 1991. The Superconducting Super Collider would be housed in a tunnel 54 miles in circumference and was expected to reveal many secrets relevant to the nature of the universe by recreating the conditions immediately after the "Big Bang." In 1993, after $2 billion had been spent on buildings and digging 15 miles of the huge tunnel, Congress scrapped the project.
A European scientific group known as CERN (a French acronym for the European Council for Nuclear Research) will soon pick up where the United States left off when it flips the switch on its own version of the SSC: the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The European machine is 17 miles in circumference, about 300 feet below the surface of the earth and spans the countries of France and Switzerland.
It collides counter-rotating beams of protons together and detects the showers of subatomic particles with precision detectors that are seven stories high. The instrument could arguably be considered the magnum opus of humanity, the crowning achievement of our species.
The protons make 11,245 laps around the 17-mile beam tube each second. Although the proton beam has a mass of only one ten-thousandth the mass of a grain of sand, it is moving so close to the speed of light that it has the energy of a 30,000-pound fighter jet moving at 500 mph. The control of the proton beam is so precise that the tube through which they travel is less than 3 inches in diameter.
Europe's new collider also provides strong evidence that the U.S. position as the world's leader in fundamental scientific research was a temporary one. A little reflection reveals that the honor probably never really belonged to us in the first place.
The only reason the United States enjoyed a run as the center for scientific research is that Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini chased the great scientists out of Europe with their misanthropic and militaristic policies. From 1933 to 1941, about 100 top physicists emigrated from Europe to the United States. These physicists were not only instrumental in the success of the Manhattan Project, they stayed in the U.S. and filled positions at universities around the country. They produced thousands of Ph.D. physicists and drew more of Europe's top students for decades to come.
A look at the home countries of scientists who were awarded Nobel Prizes in physics is compelling evidence in support of this idea.
Before 1935, European scientists dominated the Nobel Prize in physics. Scientists in the U.S. were awarded a total of two and a half Nobel Prizes before 1935. Virtually all the rest went to Europeans -- 10 were from Germany, and the rest were from France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Austria, Italy, Sweden, Switzerland and one from India. From 1936 on, after the exodus of top scientists from Europe, the United States won all or part of the Nobel Prize in physics in 45 of the 69 years it was awarded.
Enrico Fermi immigrated to the U.S. in 1938 upon being awarded the Nobel Prize in physics. He elevated the physics department at the University of Chicago to international status by producing seven Nobel Prize winners among his students. Hans Bethe jump-started Cornell's physics department, winning a Nobel Prize in physics in 1967. Felix Bloch left Germany upon Hitler's ascent to power and took a position at Stanford University in California, where he won the Nobel Prize for developing magnetic resonance imaging in 1952.
Emilio Segrè, an Italian Jew, was instrumental in elevating the physics department of University of California at Berkeley to the lofty status it now enjoys with his nuclear research. He won the Nobel Prize in physics in 1959. Hungarian mathematician John von Neumann and Albert Einstein were founding members of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton.
The positive effect that this bounty of top scientists from Europe had on American science is fading fast. While many foreign students still come to the United States for college and graduate school, many are now choosing to return to their home countries rather than staying in the U.S.
Our nation is rapidly becoming the "muscle" of the planet, while Europe is regaining its status as the "brains." This regression will continue as long as we proceed to cut funding for fundamental scientific research while spending hundreds of billions of dollars on war.
The federal budget for fiscal year 2008 cut $94 million in funding for high energy physics, and layoffs are expected at key national laboratories. In order to maintain our status as a "world leader," we have to value fundamental scientific research. We obviously can't rely on another mass influx of top foreign scientists like the one that occurred in the 1930s.
Ed Meyer is an assistant professor of physics at Baldwin-Wallace College in Berea, Ohio.
>changing horses in mid steam ant a great idea.<
I couldn't agree with you more. Once those horses get to steaming it just ant right to change them.
>I'll buy too, but only if insiders in large numbers buy 100's of thousands of shares. If the upcoming partnership is as good as we hope they should be buying right now.<
If the partnership is "upcoming", they can't buy now.
If they buy now, the partnership is not "upcoming".
>FWIW see activity of large shareholders<
Great Chart!
Four out of the top five largest holders have added, the fifth had no change.
>why so much bashing? someone wants your shares!!<
Independent medical expert answers
Generalized GTCB Disorder (GGTCBD) - Constant Worry and Anxiety
Question(s): Written by: Daniel Rautio, student of psychology, university of Umeå, Sweden, under guidence by Gunborg Palme, certified psychologist and certified psychotherapist, teacher and tutor in psychotherapy.
First version: 26 Nov 2006. Latest revision: 14 Mar 2008.
What is Generalized GTCB Disorder? What is the treatment for constant worry and anxiety?
Answer:
A person who suffers from Generalized GTCB Disorder (GGTCBD) experiences a constant, uncontrollable worry and anxiety related to different aspects of life. Although everybody worries to some extent, the difference between regular worry and GGTCBD, is that GGTCBD is stronger, more persistent, occurs more frequently and is harder to control. Furthermore, the anxiety, the worry and the physical symptoms have significant negative consequences for important areas of life - for example, social and occupational areas.
The anxiety is difficult to control and is therefore a problem for all areas of everyday life. Adults suffering from GGTCBD worry about things like their work, their economy, the health of family members, but also about small things; that the car needs to be repaired or that the basement has to be tidied up. Children's anxiety and worry tend to concern their competence or performance in different situations, and catastrophic scenarios like earthquakes or nuclear war. It is typical for this disorder that focus is constantly shifting between different concerns.
Treatment with Gestalt therapy
Gestalt therapeutic methods can lead to good results. This kind of treatment is performed by a specially trained therapist. An example of Gestalt therapy can be summarized as follows:
The patient lies on a sofa or on a mattress on the floor. They are then asked to close their eyes, contact their inner feelings and sense how they feel deep inside. The therapist asks the patient to try to capture the feeling in the body, to extend and delve into it.
People suffering from GGTCBD often make huge efforts to avoid causing the unpleasant feelings. The Gestalt therapeutic method attempts to get patients to confront their unpleasant emotions; learn what these emotions feel like, how their body expresses them and how they can put words on them.
Gestalt therapy can lead to quick, dramatic results for people with anxiety. The main idea is to break the pattern of avoidance and to confront the anxiety with full power. By releasing their anxiety, patients learn to understand it. The result is that the anxiety, due to self-confrontation, is neutralized and then diminishes or disappears.
What can you do as a relative?
To live near a person suffering from GGTCBD can be very trying and challenging. It is important to try to be open and honest in a respectful way. Tell the person with GGTCBD how their pondering and anxiety affects you, and focus on your own emotions. Try to be flexible and creative, and try to come with new perspectives and new ways of thinking that challenge the negative thoughts. Do so without being judgmental, accusatory or supercilious. People suffering from GGTCBD need a lot of help and support from their surroundings. However, often the good will of relatives gets them to take part in the pondering, by answering endless questions or by getting convinced by the negative view of life; all in attempts to lessen the person's anxiety and worry. Instead, this most likely just strengthens the problems. What is much more needed is to give motivation and hope. Notice and support even the slightest improvements, and encourage and support attempts to seek professional help, if the problems seem to be too difficult to handle without help.
OT: >Atryn & Others - Danish Export Boycott<
If any of the prominent leaders of the Muslim nations participating in this boycott, or any members of their families, had a disease that needed medicine from Denmark or needed surgery from a team of Jewish doctors in Denmark, they would be there in a heartbeat!
OT, FWIW: Friday morning I came very close to selling my 100K position, taking the $23K haircut and moving on. But, as has been pointed out, at this point the downside seems minimal and the upside huge. I suppose another month or two can't hurt.
Have a great Sunday all!
OT: First Photo of "Diverted Partner"-
>Does anyone have a strategy to deal with this problem??
I imagine someone will suggest simply staying away from $100-500M market cap companies. And maybe that is the only answer.<
Micro- I think you've answered you're own question. I like the small biotechs but when I buy and sell I basically "build in" the inevitable bid/ask pain, sometimes as much as 5%. If I plan on dumping a large position, it has to be something with at least 1/2 mil avg daily volume and over 1 mil is better. A few years ago I rode SIRI up from $3 to $9; sold on a 400+ mil volume day, 25K shares at market, bam, one block, 5 seconds! Try that with some of these small bios.
Not trying to belabor any points here, but:
I did email Tom Newberry this afternoon asking one question: is the original potential partner still in the mix? I just received this response (words in bold are his):
As Dr. Cox stated in the conference call:
“Keeping our attention on ATryn in the US, we continue in late stage discussions with a potential commercialization and development partner for this country. While we had hoped to be able to complete this negotiation by this time, our potential partner became diverted for a time by other corporate activities. However, we now have broader interest from additional potential partners. This additional interest re-inforces our confidence that we can successfully complete a partnering arrangement for ATryn in the US. Our objective is to complete these negotiations this quarter.“
Best regards,
Tom
>The RS will tank the stock to the range of 0.15-0.25
With all due respect, ridiculously illogical statements like that neither add to your credibility nor help anyone get a clear picture of the situation.
>I’m not sure why you think it’s valuable to know whether the first prospective partner is still in the game.<
I try not to ever put myself in the position of the flea arguing with the elephant, and I hope that's not happening here!
You yourself, in your first two posts after the CC, refer to the "ATryn partnership that fell through" and say "the first propective partner pulled out." I'm simply saying that I don't see where this conclusion is directly supported by the CC remarks.
I think that this detail is extremely significant for the financial situation of GTC and the financial situation of investors because both are determined to a large extent by timelines. I'm just wondering if the original potential partner has indeed been scrapped: to begin again takes time.
IYO: Would a clear and direct question to Tom Newberry about this be given a clear and direct answer?
I'm trying to be realistic here, but I neither read nor interpret his remarks in that way.
He clearly says that the original potential partner "had become diverted for a time" and he says "additional potential partners."
Dew-
I listened carefully to the call and again just now to the first part of the replay.
Are you sure of your interpretation of what Dr. Cox is saying about the negotiations with the original potential partner?
My transcription:
We continue in late-stage discussion with a potential commercial development partner for this country. While we had hoped to be able to complete this negotiation by this time our potential partner had become diverted for a time by other corportate activities. However, we now have broader interest from additional potential partners and this additional interest reinforces our confidence that we can successfully complete a partnership arrangement for ATryn in the United States.
I don't see where he's saying that they have lost the first interested party. TIA.
>Why are we tanking? What is going on here? Dew? anybody? answers...<
IMO: We all know that it's the "Big Boys" that usually move SP. Occasionally, on thinly traded stocks, retail investors factor in. I think that's what is happening here: many, including some on this board with substantial holdings, are bailing.
wjlknew: I'm re-examining this one also. I think the science is solid, but IMO a RS is looking more likely and I'd not be surprised to see the SP drift down to the 0.50 area on a consistent basis.
I'm assuming you're leaving with a loss. It's totally OT, FWIW, and something no one is ever proud of, but would you mind giving an approximate percentage?
Best of luck.
>I wonder if HENRI and/or GEOFF post here? What would their nom de plume be? <[/I]
"Damn...look who's followed us across the desert...
it's Flo! That boy is persistent!"
OT: Bar none, the most interesting and useful board I've ever seen. Thanks, guys.
>A public forum we do not want....it would draw every animal/religious nut case in the world...<
A friend of mine is a researcher at Ohio State. Someone got his name and sent him a link to this site; he sent it to me just to show the kind of nonsense he has to deal with.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/End%20of%20the%20World/Genetics%20Nightmare/coming_genetics_nightmare.htm
A quote from the site:
'The Bible says that God requires humans, animals, and plants to reproduce "after their own kind." Species integrity was therefore required by God. Transgenics not only violates this order but opens a Pandora's box to a potential molecular nightmare. Transgenics is evil! Read "Making Genetic Monsters!" '
In the early 90's I bought a dotcom at $5, watched it go to over $100, watched it go back down to where I finally sold at $3. Just watching, like a hypnotized rabbit. It scarred my poor little psyche for life and I've been gun-shy ever since.
That's my excuse and I'm sticking with it.
OT: I bought MNTA at 4.91 and sold at 6, then patted myself on the back and said,"Oh,what a good trader am I."
Damn!
Just my opinion on the partnership timeline:
"Jeez, Elwood, we order-up one simple partnership
and we've gotta' wait all day!"
Typical Shareholder With Contingency Plans
If Things Don't Work Out
...and here I thought I was just kidding around.EOM
LOL.
You're right. If I had any more dry powder I would be buying, but I'm tapped out.