Replies to post #106676 on Biotech Values

[iwfal]

I nevertheless find his opinion noteworthy because it’s the strongest statement in favor of all-oral cures for HCV that I’ve heard from anyone of consequence in the industry

?? I know you have other times quoted industry sources being very authoritative (without data) on this topic as a basis for argument. (Which has always surprised me.) I don't remember who it was - but I guess it is possible it was always the same guy?

the base post in this thread contained some questionable assertions by you

Could you point that out - since I am generally pretty careful NOT to make assertions on this topic. In fact that only comments I can remember making on this thread were:

a) It is unlikely that the BMY data on the dual DAA was shared with Zymo board members who voted for the deal. And it would have been pertinent.

b) That I disagree with the virtual certainty many people seem to ascribe to eliminating SOC from HCV treatment.

More generally, I have discovered that I differ from many people in that I am happy to operate in probabilistic space - but it often causes people to either misinterpret what I have said (e.g. I say I disagree with a virtual certainty and people hear me say that I believe it is a virtual certainty the other way.) or get annoyed that 'you aren't taking a position'. C'est la vie. But apologies if it confuses or frustrates.

[dewophile]

Note that the base post in this thread contained some questionable assertions by you and dewophile based on the failure of a two-drug oral regimen from BMY.

a failure of 2 drug regimen does not mean 3 or 4 drugs won't work, but it certainly lowers the odds of 2 drugs working (remember roche also was going to toy with dropping components of SOC in 2 drug regiments in the INFORM trials). at a minimum this means a delay in achieving all-DAA therapies (if any do prove viable)