I have appreciated and respected your contributions to this board for as long as I've been reading it, however, my critical comments regarding ELTP are spot on. I can accept your criticism, but I submit you focus on ELTP as a whole rather than in an optimistic, narrow scope.
Please. Many words have been used to describe my presence here, but narrow and optimistic don't apply. My shtick is that both criticism and praise should be truthful. I've made plenty of complaints along the way, all of them based on facts. The message I replied to said that the 2 bead ADF was invalid because it didn't prevent overdose and because of the tmax issue. Neither of those criticisms are reasonable, not to mention "spot on." No known ADF tech prevents overdose, and the tmax issue is limited to oxycodone IR agonist bead, totally unrelated to the 2 bead antagonist tech. It has nothing to do with optimism and everything to do with realism. Make a valid critique, and I will never say a word.
I contend:
Management failed to navigate the approval process in a timely and strategic manner. This failure in management has caused an indefinite delay for SequestOx. This delay substantially devalues the technology and makes it nearly impossible for ELTP to sell and market it. Too many years have passed.
No doubt SequestOx was a cluster from the beginning until today. Terrible, awful execution. My past comments are all on the record (ever hear of Zombie SequestOx*?). But there is no reason to say the delay has devalued the tech or had any effect on the company's ability to market it. How is it that too many years passed? What does that even mean? There is still no immediate release ADF opioid on the market. RoxyBond (hardshell oxy IR) was approved in April, and yet still no word about when it will hit the shelves. There are also multiple extended release opioids with ADF that have been approved but are still not on the shelf, including MorphaBond and Troxyca. This indicates that the ADF market has never developed as many expected. FDA has still never publicly supported the need for immediate-release ADF's, despite the solid data that shows IR drugs like Percocet, Norco, and oxyIR are the true gateway drugs to heroin addiction. Likewise, insurance companies are more interested in pleasing their shareholders than taking good care of their covered lives. For the most part, they continue to prefer to pay for the cheaper non-ADF versions, and that will continue to be the case until state and Federal legislators make it otherwise. Even in the heights of this opioid crisis, we still allow kids to snort Percocet and we still allow addicts to chew OxyContin and inject buprenorphine. (OxyContin and Suboxone are solid proof that even the currently approved ADF's are substandard.) I continue to believe that someday every opioid pill sold will be high-quality ADF, but I haven't seen any sign of it yet. One thing that has to happen before then is there has to be a plethora of affordable options, and so far that is not the case. Elite has the ability to contribute to this fight, and I disagree entirely that they are late-arriving. The battle is just beginning, and there is plenty of time to join. ELTP's 2 bead antagonist ADF is capable of preventing snorting, chewing, and injecting of any IR or ER opioid, and that is a fact.
But what I was trying to express is that Elite started an ADF company multiple years before OxyContin came out. It would be nine more years until the movie OxyContin Express won the Peabody for documenting the craziness in Florida. By then, Elite had been less than a dime for nearly two years. ADF OxyContin didn't come out until 2010, and before that nobody ever heard of an ADF label. A lot has changed since then. We have a whole new language for describing ADF properties, testing for effectiveness, and certifying the label. My bet here is that it is worth something to have a unique ADF tech that can readily meet the requirements for chewing, snorting, and IV abuse deterrence labels for any opioid agonist and any time-release characteristic (even if it isn't first and isn't revolutionary).