InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 29
Posts 9421
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/30/2006

Re: TheBocx post# 18606

Thursday, 04/09/2009 7:57:07 PM

Thursday, April 09, 2009 7:57:07 PM

Post# of 30387
The bocx stated: "Please explain to all of us how an amendment signed in 2009 prevented Dr. Moro from selling in 2007 and 2008..."

Isn't that the reason you gave for Moro drawing a salary in 2007 and 2008? You should decide which is correct.


The bocx stated: "Thus, if a patient has lung cancer and he or she gets a RECAF test, it will be negative, because according to your statement, RECAF does not detect lung cancer. But that is not true; RECAF IS positive and therefore the statement is incorrect; RECAF DOES detect lung cancer."

Of course that is not what I stated. I stated that RECAF cannot detect lung cancer. Take your example. The patient has lung cancer and he also has colon cancer. The recaf test is positive. What cancer has RECAF detected? None. It only detected that maybe cancer was present and it may be a false positive. Lets say the doctor orders a PSA test. A PSA test is positive. What does the doctor do now? Biopsy the prostate? The biopsy is inconclusive. What does the doctor do now? He orders another biopsy. It is also inconclusive. What now? Some doctors would at this point treat the patient for prostate cancer. Did RECAF find the colon cancer? NO. Did RECAF detect lung cancer? NO. The patient still has undiagnosed lung and colon cancers.

Lets say the doctor later decides that maybe it is time for the patient to have a colonoscopy. He finds a tumor and takes a biopsy. It is positive. The tumor is removed but the patient still has undected lung cancer.

Now tell me again. Did RECAF detect lung cancer? NO IT DID NOT.

"Interesting science but clinically a waste of time."

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.