News Focus
News Focus
icon url

dodah_2

08/07/06 5:23 PM

#376 RE: DewDiligence #375

Dew... would you mind defining your sense of "impressive return"? I won't hold you to it because there are too many imponderables.
icon url

xrymd

08/07/06 5:47 PM

#377 RE: DewDiligence #375

Dew: I'll take a swing at it. Burns are easy to identify, quantify and stratify and therefore easier to treat without deviating from a designed protocol. Sepsis is much more difficult to correctly diagnose and timing of both the diagnosis and treatment would likely be more variable. This could produce extremely variable results. Someone who is in early sepsis may be salvagable at 8 hours (lets say 4am with a night shift nurse "looking after" him), if there is a delay in diagnosis or delvering treatment may be unsalvageable a mere 4 hours later.

That being said why not swing for the fences. It would really help humanity to develop an effective treatment for sepsis. I have a hunch if they design the trial well and get people to adhere to the protocol the results may be suprisingly god.
icon url

ThomasS

08/07/06 7:43 PM

#381 RE: DewDiligence #375

o/t: I have a personal interest in burns, nothing else. Besides, even the stupidist of stupid understand the implications of burn care.
When burns occur, everyone understands. (Even Cowen's analyst Phil would!)
Regardless, I am strictly an investor... I have confidence in LEO's pursuit.