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.
well put; knowledge is power and the more we learn about the company, the more relaxed we can be. The more holes srsr drills, the closer we get to 43-101 compliance and hopefully a producing mine !
Important CEO Q&A from the company's web site:
Question: Good Morning.
What is the specific supporting strategy for the
statement: "This will be a very lucrative company indeed." In re: GenoDrugDiscovery.
Answer:
It currently requires $1 billion in investment, and 12 years of work, to bring a single new drug to market.
Most biotech companies focus on bringing a single drug to market. The hope is that theirs will be a "blockbuster" drug and earn $1-3 billion dollars a year for 5-8 years. The classic example is Amgen, whose drug EPOGEN revolutionized the dialysis industry, doubling Medicare's cost the first year it was introduced. Amgen remains the most successful biotech company in history, although it's currently in trouble because EPOGEN has competitors.
Even giant research pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer and Merck are thrilled if they can bring 1 or 2 new drugs to market every year. Like Amgen, big pharmaceutical companies are also in trouble because their pipelines are dry.
Now consider our position: since our last investment of roughly $1 million in early 2004, GenoMed has discovered about three thousand (3,000) genes for each of six common cancers. Each of these genes is a separate target. Each target could generate several new drugs. In other words, we have more targets than the entire pharmaceutical industry has ever made drugs against. That number is supposed to be something like 500. All the existing drugs target only 500 genes.
The human genome has 25,000 genes. So there are a lot more drugs to be made.
There are many other companies who boast lots of cancer targets. Anybody can use an Affymetrix chip to interrogate all 25,000 genes. But our SNPs operate upstream of the tumor-expressed genes that everybody else has. Because of the "cascades" in biology, blocking an upstream step is much more effective clinically than blocking downstream steps.
Put differently, it's a lot easier to stop the Mississippi River at its source at Lake Itasca, than to dam it in New Orleans.
So our targets trump everyone else's in terms of clinical efficacy. That means we should have no problems showing that our drugs stop the cancer. We've already shown this with one class of drugs, namely ACE inhibitors.
But that's not why 99.9% of new drugs fail. They fail mostly because of toxicity.
Here's another crucial GenoMed advantage.
Because we have so many thousands of high-quality targets, we can afford to throw most of them away. We can throw out the 99.9% of our initial drug leads that are toxic, and just focus on the 0.1% that are safe as well as effective.
No other drug discovery company can boast this.
Let me put this into numbers. We already have 3,000 gene targets for each of the following cancers: breast, colon, lung, ovary, pancreas, and prostate. Let's say we find 3 drug structures per gene target (or protein). That will give us 9,000 drugs for each cancer. Now, let's throw out 99.9% of them because they fail toxicity assays, which will be the first thing we run on any of these drugs. That still leaves us with 9 drugs per cancer.
It's no wonder that biotech investing has been so disappointing. Historically, biotech companies have focussed on mechanism, like the NIH. They've pursued drugs that were effective, but they only had the resources to pursue a single drug. But 99.9% of effective drugs fail because of unacceptable toxicity. So 99.9% of biotech companies, being one-trick ponies, fail.
GenoMed can beat these horrible odds, since we start with thousands of great targets, and can afford to discard most of them.
Large numbers: "that's the power of genomics(tm)."
To summarize, and just to make sure I answer your question: 9 new cancer chemotherapy drugs for each of six cancers (54 drugs), times $500 million per year per drug--let's be conservative here--adds up to a lot of revenue ($27 billion a year). Even if we produce only one new drug for each of six cancers, we'll still earn 6 x $500 M = $3 billion a year.
GenoMed investors will own a substantial piece of each drug, despite the $1 billion in dilutional investment required for each drug. With a little bit of luck, we'll be able to bring the new drugs to market for less time and money than currently. Genomics has forced us to create a new business model for the pharmaceutical industry-- the "peer-reviewed virtual pharmaceutical company(tm)" of collaborating scientists in academic labs, coordinated by GenoMed, and funded by financial institutions which have until now just been on the sidelines of the pharmaceutical industry.
Best regards,
Dave Moskowitz MD
CEO
GenoMed, Inc.
Quote from another Q&A session:
"We used the $1.1 million investment from 2004 to find about 5,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms for each of the 6 most common cancers in whites, namely breast, colon, lung, ovary, pancreas, and prostate. These SNPs, occurring in about 2,000 genes, are the basis of the next generation of cancer diagnostics and therapeutics. Although billions of dollars, and hundreds of groups, are trying to find disease-causing genes, we're the only group so far that has succeeded. We're currently looking for more investment to carry on the fight against cancer."
Use and importance of SNPs (per wikipedia):
Variations in the DNA sequences of humans can affect how humans develop diseases and respond to pathogens, chemicals, drugs, vaccines, and other agents. SNPs are also thought to be key enablers in realizing the concept of personalized medicine.[3] However, their greatest importance in biomedical research is for comparing regions of the genome between cohorts (such as with matched cohorts with and without a disease).
Genomed Patents and Patent Applications:
Issued Patents
1.) Patent number: 6,998,404
Treatment or prevention of acute renal failure
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=48&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=genomed&OS=genomed&RS=genomed
2.) Patent number: 6,939,534
Method to treat pulmonary hypoplasia in the newborn
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=52&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&s1=genomed&p=2&OS=genomed&RS=genomed
Pending Patents:
1.) Patent application#: 20020197632
Method to find disease-associated SNPs and genes
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=5&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=genomed&s2=Moskowitz&OS=genomed+AND+Moskowitz&RS=genomed+AND+Moskowitz
2.) Patent Appliaction #: 20030040509
Methods and compositions for treating diseases associated with excesses in ACE
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=2&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=genomed&s2=Moskowitz&OS=genomed+AND+Moskowitz&RS=genomed+AND+Moskowitz
3.) Patent Application#: 20060135422
Use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) to treat diseases associated with excess ACE
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=genomed&s2=Moskowitz&OS=genomed+AND+Moskowitz&RS=genomed+AND+Moskowitz
nice work! thanks for the link
Obama backs personalized medicine:
from: http://www.glgroup.com/News/Obama-Backs-Personalized-Medicine-29947.html
"Obama's election bodes well for diagnostic test manufacturers and commercial reference labs that provide "personalized medicine" diagnostics that link the right patient with the right therapy."
"Obama has supported personalized medicine and as a senator introduced legislation that would enhance its progression through better coordination between Federal agencies and increased funding. House of Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, D-R.I. has introduced legislation in the House that uses the Obama bill as its foundation."
**Cramer talks personalized medicine recently and discusses the merger and acquisition activity in the sector: http://www.cnbc.com/id/28813740
**An article released recently on personalized health care: "Deloitte Center for Health Solutions found significant opportunities for the adoption of personalized medicine to produce a positive return on investment across key stakeholders in the U.S. health care system."
"Personalized medicine is not a promise of the future; it is fast emerging as the current state in diagnostics and therapeutics," said Terry Hisey, vice chairman and U.S. industry leader for Deloitte LLP's Life Sciences industry group."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28873350
**pursuit of "personalized medicine" is expected to get a major push
from: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/11/29/personalized_medicine_may_get_a_boost/
Now the pursuit of "personalized medicine" is expected to get a major push from the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama. As a senator, Obama introduced legislation to coordinate the sometimes conflicting policies of government agencies and provide more support for private research. He remains keen on the idea.
"The president-elect has indicated his support for both advancing personalized medicine and increasing [research] funding," said Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, Democrat from Rhode Island, who has introduced legislation in the House that builds on Obama's.
Nice find! looks like Tandy from DNAG spoke at the event:
4:15 – 5:00 p.m. Discussion
Tandy Herren, Ph.D.
DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals
per the last 10Q: As of June 27, 2005, we had 197,211,040 shares of our common stock outstanding. Since the current o/s as of 02/02/09 is 221,170,711, that means only 23,959,671 shares have been issued in several years. I like that a lot...some of the pink sheet companies i follow issue 100 million new shares a month lol.
i'm loving the trading on this one...up 7 out of the last 9 days!
Cramer talks personalized medicine recently and discusses the merger and acquisition activity in the sector: http://www.cnbc.com/id/28813740
An article released recently on personalized health care: "Deloitte Center for Health Solutions found significant opportunities for the adoption of personalized medicine to produce a positive return on investment across key stakeholders in the U.S. health care system."
"Personalized medicine is not a promise of the future; it is fast emerging as the current state in diagnostics and therapeutics," said Terry Hisey, vice chairman and U.S. industry leader for Deloitte LLP's Life Sciences industry group."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28873350
pursuit of "personalized medicine" is expected to get a major push
from: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/11/29/personalized_medicine_may_get_a_boost/
Now the pursuit of "personalized medicine" is expected to get a major push from the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama. As a senator, Obama introduced legislation to coordinate the sometimes conflicting policies of government agencies and provide more support for private research. He remains keen on the idea.
"The president-elect has indicated his support for both advancing personalized medicine and increasing [research] funding," said Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, Democrat from Rhode Island, who has introduced legislation in the House that builds on Obama's.
Obama backs personalized medicine:
from: http://www.glgroup.com/News/Obama-Backs-Personalized-Medicine-29947.html
"Obama's election bodes well for diagnostic test manufacturers and commercial reference labs that provide "personalized medicine" diagnostics that link the right patient with the right therapy."
"Obama has supported personalized medicine and as a senator introduced legislation that would enhance its progression through better coordination between Federal agencies and increased funding. House of Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, D-R.I. has introduced legislation in the House that uses the Obama bill as its foundation."
per company website:
GenoMed is a Next Generation DMtm company that uses medical genomics to improve patient outcomes. GenoMed is working to translate knowledge of medical genomics--the study of which genes cause disease--into clinical practice. We combine biotechnology with Disease Management (DM). We develop new and better drugs, we use existing drugs for new disease indications, and we uncover disease before symptoms arise. By studying disease genes, we hope to make medicine more proactive and disease prevention more effective.
looks like per the company website, they are issuing news, but i don't see it on the wires anywhere...
GenoMed In Discussions with Peru to Eliminate Most of Kidney Dialysis
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
David W. Moskowitz MD
CEO, GenoMed
Tel. 314.983.9938
dwmoskowitz@genomed.com
ST. LOUIS—January 26, 2009—GenoMed® (OTC Pink Sheets GMED.PK) announced today that its CEO, David Moskowitz MD, is meeting with the Director of the National Center for Kidney Health in Lima, Peru to discuss a program to prevent most kidney failure in Peru.
The Peruvian National Center for Kidney Health is the equivalent of the National Institute for Diabetes, Digestive, and Kidney Disease (NIDDK) in the U.S. A few years ago, it changed its name from the National Center for Dialysis, reflecting a new federal priority to prevent kidney failure.
GenoMed's CEO, David Moskowitz MD, said, "Peru, like all of the Americas, has a very high incidence of diabetes. Like the United States, Peru has an epidemic of kidney failure. Unlike the US, though, Peru is serious about preventing kidney failure. As the only company in the world with a cure for 90% of kidney failure, we're happy to be talking to the highest public health authority in Peru."
Continued Dr. Moskowitz, "After years of trying to market to First World countries, we've recently turned our attention to the Third World. We're finding much more interest in our products."
Dr. Moskowitz concluded by saying, "Ironically, the developing world may profit first from advances in personalized medicine. Less infrastructure—fewer hospitals and dialysis units--actually turns out to be an advantage. There's much less resistance to innovation. And the Internet allows us to deliver preventive molecular medicine inexpensively around the globe."
About GenoMed
GenoMed published how to prevent 90% of kidney failure in 2002. It is now marketing its Next Generation Disease Management service globally to patients with diabetes or high blood pressure. Please contact GenoMed at www.genomed.com or www.thelatestmedicaltreatment.com.
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward looking statements, including those statements pertaining to GenoMed, Inc.'s (the Company's) finances and treatments. The words or phrases "ought to," "should," "could," "may," or similar expressions are intended to identify "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward looking statements as a result of a number of risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to our research and development being subject to scientific, economic, regulatory, governmental, and technological factors. Statements made herein are as of the date of this press release and should not be relied upon as of any subsequent date. Unless otherwise required by applicable law, we specifically disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect occurrences, developments, unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statement.
Shares outstanding as of 02/02/09 per transfer agent: 221,170,711
thanks bud, i'll put em on my radar
absolutely agree...what mining companies currently top your list? i made good money in srsr this year - a niobium company.
i think personalized medicine is going to become a big theme in medicine this year and this company stands to really benefit from this, from what I can tell. Obama supports the development of the area. Obama sponsored the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2007. The bill was aimed at accelerating genetic research and regulating DNA testing. I've been loading up on biotech companies like this one and my portfolio has been steadily climbing up...its the only way i've found other than buying gold to actually make money in this economic disaster we are in...commodities have picked up a little bit...but not enought to convince me that we will see a big run anytime soon. anyways, gmed looks good and i'll likely be adding on any dips
nice work! i'll be adding to my position on dips then. many thanks!
what are you refering to? I think an argument can be made every single stock is manipulated. Every buy and sell order can be considered a manipulation. The way I see it every single stock is manipulated. Look at what happened to the oil market...that was manipulation taken to a whole new level...lol
hi frog i appreciate your input - I disagree on your point where you say that because no recognized expert has validated the company's technology here in this forum, that results in a negative. If I were an expert in the field, the last place I would post at would be a stock message board. I see what you are saying about the patent process. I looked at the company's patents that were issued and I don't see any indication of their patents being whittled down, so I would like to see some concrete evidence of that. Not trying to be a pest here, I just don't see what you are speaking of. maybe i'm looking in the wrong spot - i don't know.
This stock is definitely a "roulette wheel" type of play....lots of risk and a potential for a big reward. I put my bet on the table as far as what i'm willing to lose, so I'm just going to hold and see how this thing develops. If anything, there are such divergent views on this company, that it makes for an intersting story to follow.
I too, would like to see the CEO write the shareholders a letter and put it at least on their web site to say whether there is a ray of hope for this company of if it is just kaput so we can all move on here lol.
from what i read, the deal didn't go through because nanobac failed to come up with funding in a time when biotech wasn't a hot sector...it didn't appear to me that the deal fell through because of a lack of value in the patents. I think that biotech is becoming a hot sector and money will flow to it because where else is the money going? gold and low risk bonds maybe? healthcare and biotech are going to be my areas of focus this year(i've already made a ton on stem cells and i think they have a lot more upside) with some gold plays mixed in...and maybe some commodities. I appreciate where you are coming from in your investment filter..you are very objective. I'm more of a subjective investor and like to identify trends before they begin...much riskier, but its worked for me.
here is the 8k that discusses how nanobac had to raise the money:
http://www.pinksheets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=5692143
frog, it appeared to me that there is value in the patents because nanobac pharmaceuticals wanted to acquire them. If they were willing to acquire DNAG, it would seem they would have done their homework and that they were knowledgable about the value of DNAG's patents. I think that validates their value. I'm not a science expert, so many of the patents don't mean much to me...but when i see people that are experts in their field having an interest in buying DNAG, that gains my interest. can you expand a bit for me on why you think the patents are worthless?
I think the obama push towards personalized medicine will be significant enought to drive DNAG to get their act together...obviously this stock is pretty risky, but the payoff can be big. we're somewhat ahead of the curve here, but i think 2009 is the year of biotech.
I was wondering about dutchess too, but it appears that dutchess is actually working with the company. From their last 10Q, it looks to me like they want to spin off the pharmaceutical division and when that happens, and warrants are issued to dutchess, the debentures go away. Would like to hear others' thoughts on this.
rom: http://www.pinksheets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=5542633
On July 20, 2007, we entered into a letter agreement with Dutchess whereby Dutchess agreed to the transfer of certain assets in our Pharmaceutical division to DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Pharmaceuticals”) and released their security interest in such assets and in the common stock of Pharmaceuticals. For this, within 45 days after the end of each calendar quarter, we shall pay to Dutchess a payment on the Dutchess notes equal to the sum of i) 80% of the royalty income paid to us by Pharmaceuticals during the preceding calendar quarter and ii) 4% of all other cash received by us from sales of goods or services during the preceding calendar quarter. Also, on the date on which the common stock of Pharmaceuticals either (i) becomes subject to the reporting requirements of Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or (ii) becomes listed or eligible for trading on any exchange or other trading system (the “Pharmaceuticals Issuance Date"), we shall cause Pharmaceuticals to issue to Dutchess warrants to purchase two million shares of Pharmaceuticals common stock, at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, expiring July 31, 2012. Such warrants shall be issued in full payment of the Incentive Debentures, and immediately upon the issuance of such warrants, any and all Dutchess Incentive Debentures shall be discharged in full, and Dutchess shall surrender to us the original executed Dutchess Incentive Debentures. If the balance on the Dutchess Incentives Debentures as of the Pharmaceuticals Issuance Date is less than $2 million (such difference being referred to as the "Shortfall"), then on such date, we shall be deemed to have made a principal payment on the Dutchess Notes in the amount of the Shortfall.
On the Pharmaceuticals Issuance Date, we shall cause Pharmaceuticals to issue to Dutchess up to two million shares of Pharmaceuticals common stock as payment of amounts due under the Dutchess Notes; provided, however, in no event shall we be required to issue to Dutchess shares having a value in excess of the amounts then due under the Dutchess Notes. For purposes of determining the amount of such payment, the Pharmaceuticals common stock shall have a deemed value equal to the gross sales proceeds realized by Dutchess upon its disposition of such stock.
i see..so they basically have to file a report and give them a few dollars... hopefully they can adress that and get it squared away
you're right poor choice of words by me..they are incorporated in utah. but that should be the only state that matters with being current on corporate filings shouldn't it? I don't understand what any florida corporate filings has to do with dnag.
yes very strange..there's a few lose ends with this one that needs to be tied up. Once they get them tied up (hopefully) i think the push towards personalized medicine will take care of the rest.
hi fox, actually the company is domiciled in utah and I think i saw a post on here from someone showing that they were active in that state...i would still need to verify that though. Agree 100% on the storefront. I think daniel has a question into the company about this and we're awaiting response from them. Hopefully they respond!
there might be a bit of a lag time on the lab results from the other drill targets...personally, I didn't view the pr as fluffy - I like it when companies make an effort to communicate what's going on and i'm willing to cut them a little slack on not having the lab results right away...and I thought the fact that they want to drill more holes is newsworthy. My question is, how many more holes to be drilled for 43-101 compliance? Does anyone here know what the avearage lead-time is for lab results for samples?
that's not true - corporations domiciled in one state, can do business in all the other states.
The right to engage in interstate commerce it has often been declared is a federal right, and is, therefore, independent of state control.
ya the debt sucks, but don't many of the balance sheets of small biotech companies look like this? Its kind of skewed in a way because the assets are mainly the intellectual property and they are not really reprsented on the balance sheet. The intellectual property is the story here in my opionion, as it is with actc.
actually actc was in a much worse position than dnag from what i can tell...they had 17 million in liablities and were on the verge of bankruptcy when i looked into them last summer. It would seem to me that dutchess is done selling...OR they haven't exercised any further converstion options yet. It looks like the O/S has stayed the same over the last few months per daniel's comment.
looks like the company has a few kinks to iron out, but if actc can make it out of the ashes, so may dnag...we'll have to see..will be fun to see how this story plays out
nice work! excellent to see some numbers on this.
why did the DNAG i-box on this board get deleted? That contained important information.
Its not an assumption, its fact: here is the new patent application dated December 28, 2008:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=%22dnaprint%20genomics%22&OS=
Abstract
Methods are provided for inferring whether a subject to be treated with a drug such as a statin or an ACE inhibitor is likely to suffer an adverse effect due to the treatment. Also provided are compositions for practicing the methods.
cool thanks daniel...looking forward to see what this year holds for the company
hi dan, I did press zero and got the voice mail...i'll try a bit later. How have your interactions with sara been? has she indicated that the company has an interest in communicating with their shareholders again? the company continues to file patents i see, but no news on them.
that's cool everyone has their own filters...if you happen to buy the stock, i wish you luck
that's a good question. I would like to know too. I just called them but couldn't get ahold of anyone. Got the recording saying "your call is imporant to us" - clearly its not lol. Has anyone been able to reach them by phone? Most of these small companies don't answer their phones. If just one would take the time to speak to thier investors i would shower them with gifts.