InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 35
Posts 6308
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/09/2015

Re: NanoEngineer post# 105685

Monday, 06/01/2015 6:30:03 AM

Monday, June 01, 2015 6:30:03 AM

Post# of 403158
Yes I agree with both of your points, I think they were clearly spelled out as 1, and then a 2.

As I posted prev, Shapiro shoulda put up a poster that should have just said "See you next year!" in big letters, that is how helpful it was.

With such severe limitations why did they choose the data they did release? Why tell us there is a range all the way up to 200%, but that half of pts had no response? If they say that , then why not something about 350/450 as announced by Leo on 4/21?

Your response- because there are severe limitations on data release is true- BUT there is data on the poster, so they can pick and choose.

My main concern over the weekend was the big flurry of everyone saying how wonderful it all was and how we learned new stuff. Nauseating, really.

At least your post clearly explains that we cannot learn new stuff about an ongoing trial at ASCO
Even though they did put some data up that was sorta new- here we go again.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent IPIX News