Recently it was reported that patients under Aranesp have anaphylaxis incidents of 0.48%, more than double compared to those injected with Omontys's 0.2%.
Among 1028 patients experiencing side effects of Mirera, 0.58% of patients have anaphylactic Shock which is almost triple comparing to the Omontys incidents (0.2%).
AFFY Longs. If you happen to be intelligent and understand statistics, I urge you seriously to read and comprehend just how outrageous a deception the declaes post actually is. He is trying to say O is more benign than Mircera/Aranesp insofar as anaphylaxis is concerned when truth is it actually has about a 100-fold greater incidence of anaphylaxis than O's competition. If AFFY and O are such great investments, ask yourself why is it necessary for longs to purposefully deceive by their posts?
Interestingly, look at how many "thumbs up" a purposefully misleading post like declaes post above receives. Compare that to the number of "thumbs down" my truthful analysis exposing declaes' deception gets. I invite you to draw your own honest conclusions.
Actually con artist...I did my undergrad at Cornell in Econometrics and Statistics and YOUR CLAIMS are 100% ERRONEOUS. All people need to do is to read the FDA's side by side analysis of Omontys vs. Epogen to see how totally fallacious your point is...And they don't need a heavy background like I have (and seriously doubt you have) in statistics to KNOW that on efficacy they came out about a tie, safety went to Omontys (STATISTICALLY SPEAKING) and also Epogen caused adverse events AND Fatalities along the entire life-cycle of usage, not just the first 30 minutes in 3 out of 25,000 patients first dose (90 something if you include ALL AE's). THIS IS FDA INFO not mine you #$%$ con artist!!! But the one thing the FDA did not cite, but everyone here knows if they've done the slightest bit of research is the SIGNIFICANT COST ADVANTAGES provided by Omontys over Amgen's ESA's...In an environment where Dialysis Clinics are under severe pressure to reduce costs, especially by Medicare (tons of articles on this last point!!!)...
Nice stating you CON ARTIST...The TRUTH WITH THE INTENT TO DECEIVE IS STILL A LIE AND YOU'RE STILL LYING THROUGH YOUR EFFIN TEETH!!! LAWYERS-----ARGGGGHHHHH!!!!
Godwinpeak... Do you realy think i make this stuf up myself? Do some dd and you will find the same results. Please stop call me a liar. You are the big misleader in this whole story. Sorry for confronting you with the truth. Gnight
Don't forget why you bought AFFY. You smoked Maxdad weed and drank Exp Kool-Aid to cloud your judgment. Look at the facts. Omontys is not coming back. No unmet medical need. Unsafe for patients compared to industry standard ESAs. Takeda knows this. It decided not to market O in Japan. It withdrew O's MAA from the EMA. It removed O from its website as one of its products. It shut down O's own website. It is defending litigation related to the O disaster. An AFFY buy and hold investment will prove to be a disaster, just like O.
Geez who you calling names. You deliberately mislead by sins of omission. If the safety issue is resolved O will definitely be welcomed on the market because it is much more cost effective than
Another deceptive lying POS long post. Go to the eHealthMe website, search Aranesp and Mircera, and look at the reports yourself. What they disclose is compared to all adverse reactions reported to the FDA for these two drugs, what is the percentage that was anaphylaxis? For Aranesp it was .48%; and for Mircera .58%
We can calculate the same percentage basis for Omontys based on the number of adverse incidents reported by the Wall Street Journal: 12 patient deaths and 98 serious adverse events [AE]= 110 reported AEs for Omontys. With respect to anaphylaxis, the percentage AFFY/Takeda disclosed was .2% out of 25,000 patients treated equals 50 patients. Divide 50 anaphylaxis AE by the 110 total AE= 45.45%. Conclusion: It appears that Omontys' allergic reaction rate compared to all AEs is about 100 fold higher than Arenesp/Mircera. Indeed, this cursory analyis supports the results previously calculated and reported by Raymond Baird analyst Christoper Raymond. In his research report, published soon after O's recall, he determined that "[L]ooking at FDA’s adverse event database for Epogen, Omontys appears to confer a 100-fold higher incidence of hypersensitivity and an 8.5-fold higher incidence of drug-related death (and that’s new)."
That is a far cry, and totally unrelated to from compared to all patients administered the drug, how many get anaphylaxis? Declaes, in his typical AFFY long desperation mode, is comparing apples to oranges and trying to mislead others once again. Because longs habitually lie and mislead in their posts, it makes me even more confident in my short position.
12 Deaths that have not been confirmed or linked to the drug. Cherry picking statistics to bolster your "case". Oh, btw, there is no need to equalize percentages. If something occurs 5% of the time then that is the rate. If I make a free throw 85% of the time and you make one 50% of the time it doesn't matter about the number of attempts. All it means is that if I get 1000 attempts I score 850 points and if you make 500 attempts, you score only 250 points. Simple math. Tool.