Biotech Values

[tinkershaw]

In regard to the Campath article. This was posted in response on the Investor Village board. It is taken from the NEJM article and contrasts strongly with the positive words from the Reuters article which has to be considered, at least partially, a fluff piece. Particularly the portion of that article that states "although no clinical data to support it, Campath is more effective, and safer than tysabri".

In some situations campath has good efficacy that may or not be greater than tysabri, although the duration of this efficacy is in dispute. But campath is most definitely not safer than tysabri. But it is a Reuters piece, so such fluff is to be expected.

In any event, the contrast between the article and what was actually stated in the NEJM article appears to be miles apart (again, as is not unusual for a Reuters piece, and in particular this author (isn't she the same author who said that 35,000 patients was a drop off from 31,000 patients last quarter)?

http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=160&mn=295128&pt=msg&mid=5944430

Tinker