Replies to post #169720 on Biotech Values

[jq1234]

I am having a real hard time taking your above quote seriously. It seems what you are tiring to imply is that if you kill the malignancy in the bone marrow and return the blood to normalcy we are not sure this is good? I am sure many dying patients with Myelofibrosis will take there chances in getting that result.

That's not what I implied. Look at ET trial, what those hematological and molecule responses led to? I didn't see any report of clinical response. You sounded like you knew the answer already, then tell me because I don't know.

listen to the 2nd quarter call it was addressed.

I listened already. Their answers basically was they didn't know the reason, stopped the investigation without any action recommended. In earlier cc they said they would find out the reason.

when the shorts were spreading info that Revlimid was toxic

Stop the nonsense about shorts spreading info. Search the archive posting on this board, you'll find out I was one of very few defenders of Imetelstat earlier this year. Anyone who blames shorts is a loser IMO.

They have a cohort in AML and MDS.

Why didn't they start their own trial in AML/MDS earlier this year, instead waited Tefferi to add the cohort recently? I understand their rationale in waiting Tefferi's MF result before they start their own trial in MF. I don't understand why they waited this long in AML/MDS. If they believed their drug, they could have started AML/MDS trial concurrently with Tefferi's MF trial. We'd know the result already. There got to be a reason! I can't find one.