A contrary view on HEPH
John et al: in my admittedly cursory DD on HEPH, I’ve reached the opinion that your accusations of a political boondoggle favoring AMGN at the expense of HEPH may be overlooking a more pertinent issue: that Neumune’s efficacy in combating ARS is modest.
For instance, in the latest data presented by HEPH, the percentage of primates who survived a severe bout of radiation was only slightly higher in the Neumune arm than in the “best supportive care” arm. I have not seen a statement that the benefit of Neumune in the severe-ARS group was statistically significant (although I may have missed it), so it’s reasonable to infer that it was not.
Thus, it seems plausible to me that Dr. Fauci of NIAID is refraining from striking a large HEPH-friendly deal because Fauci doesn’t think Neumune is the answer to the question of how the county can protect citizens in a terrorist incident involving nuclear fallout.
Just because AMGN’s Neulasta is a bad solution to ARS from terrorism does not imply that HEPH’s Neumune is a good solution. Perhaps the most sensible step NIAID can take is the one they are actually taking: refraining from funding a large contract at taxpayers’ expense for any existing drug because none of them is of much practical value in the event of a nuclear attack. JMHO, FWIW
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
