Replies to post #79293 on DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[dgplexus]

"frogdreaming,"

For the sake of simplicity, how about you just provide evidence to support your claim that "distributors" (plural) dropped DNAPrint Genomics' products due to "lack of sales." The example you provided was solidly refuted by the material Sam posted, and you have not provided anything since then, to support your claim.

You made that claim in the context of insinuating that all distributors would experience "lack of sales" and drop DNAPrint's products, that it would all just lead to nothing -- which was unfounded, pure speculation that turned out to be based on a false example.

Either provide evidence supporting your claim, or withdraw it. Untrue, unfounded, harmful statements against DNAG will not be left unchallenged.

[dgplexus]

It appears reasonable to me, that the Theranostics tests listed on the DNAPrint Product Pipeline page, and similar tests that could be developed, could in themselves be the basis for a Pharmaceutical (or Pharma-Diagnostics) spin-off, even if licenses to the two chemical entities mentioned, are not part of it.

http://www.dnaprint.com/welcome/pipeline/

Theranostics, also known as DNA Personalized Medicine, is widely projected to become a large and fast-growing market. DNAPrint Genomics has an important position in that field, holding valuable intellectual property and expertise, and not facing much visible competition, to date. The day is young, for Theranostics.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=theranostics&aq=f&oq=

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=theranostics&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn

http://www.google.com/search?sa=N&tab=nw&q=dna%20OR%20genetic%20personalized%20medicine

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&nolr=1&q=dna+OR+genetic+personalized+medicine

Personally, I'm much more excited about this emerging field, and about the ancestry testing and forensics applications, than about those two chemical entities.

As always, I'm willing to be proven wrong. These are my opinions, and the facts as I understand them.

Note also, DNAPrint Genomics has _not_ given up on the quest for new financing. Investor Relations responds to emails, in a timely and courteous fashion, and readily discloses that they continue to seek new financing. The staff strike me as people who are really trying. This is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a "scam" company, contrary to prior unfounded allegations that have been loudly and often made.

Media like these are not so easily fooled:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22forensic+files%22+%22good+as+gold%22

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/10/dnaprint

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&q=%22dnaprint+genomics%22&ie=UTF-8

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&um=1&q=%22dnaprint%20genomics%22&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=nw

[frogdreaming]

I know it may be hard for those unfamiliar with the company it's history and its technology to parse their way through the discussion but if you try you will eventually gain a sufficient understanding to allow you to participate in that discussion.

They explained how they had abandoned all of the licenses they were working on and allowed them to default to their owners.

They were working specifically on CD-59. (I thought that by highlighting it you would be able to understand. Forgive me for such an assumption.) As you can see they abandoned it for lack of funds and allowed it to revert. They had already abandoned the PT-401 license.

They explained how they could not obtain financing and had given up on the attempt to spin off a pharmaceutical division.

The spin-off was to be a new stock offering for a new entity based on the pharmaceutical products listed above. Part of the spin-off required that Dutchess allow them access to their own assets. (Being in default on loans and having offered those assets as collateral on those loans.) Laying off the financial officer and dropping off the legitimate market by suspending SEC reporting requirements ended the spin-off.

Thirdly, you have not addressed the issue, that you falsely claimed "distributors" (plural) dropped DNAPrint Genomics' products due to "lack of sales."

It is you who will not address the issue. Family Tree, the largest and most well known website on the planet distributed the product and then discontinued it. There are no equivalent levels of distribution that can compare. Unless YOU can provide a historical record of all distributors, when they came on board and more importantly, IF they still carry the product, then you are in no position to claim any falsehood. If you cannot back up your claim you are 'misleading'. lol

regards,
frog