walldiver, I only just saw your reply to my message. I wasn't trying to lump you and aiming in with people who were threatening Scher & Hussain.
I "singled you out" because you had both made points that I had to acknowledge. Your point was that Mule's conflict of interest was unrelated to DNDN. You were correct and I was trying to acknowledge that.
Aiming's point was that hedge fund managers could be short sighted and put making money ahead of supporting a cancer treatment they might benefit from. I felt that their job is to make money for themselves and their clients.
I thought the FDA's clinical reviewer was quite down on the DNDN data, both with the small sample size and the post hoc analysis. Everyone who shorted the stock probably paid attention to the negative tone.
When I said DNDN longs were short sighted, I should have said that people who threaten doctors who treat prostate cancer patients and make them worry about going to pertinent oncology meetings are short sighted. If doctors who take the time and effort to serve on advisory panels get scared off, it is a loss to health care.
I should not have implied that all DNDN longs are short sighted. I did not mean that you or aiming fall into the same category.
>Anyway, I'm not sure why you lumped Aiming and me in together with the dumba*ses who threatened Scher and Hussain, but so be it. IMO, it's probably only a handful of DNDN longs at most who sent the threatening letters, not the large number implied in your post. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the same idiots who sent the asinine emails to Feuerstein (he posted some examples in his columns) also sent threatening letters to Scher and Hussain.<
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.