Sir Adam bashed another stock that I was invested in - INSM. When the company announced trial results he wrote that data was released on a "per protocol" basis as opposed to itt which includes all trial participants including those that left the study. He asked "what is the company trying to hide..." The stock took a big hit until a conference call was held to discuss the results. The CEO put Sir Adam's entire argument to rest with one simple statement - "The FDA requested that the results be released on a per protocol basis." All losses were picked up by the end of the day.
Fuerstein often opens his mouth seemingly with no facts whatsoever....
Yep, we knew it was coming. What's funny is after following him on twitter now for about 6 months, he's pretty predictable.
What's surprising is how 'toned down' and civil he is versus his answer back on 9/2/11
Being a self taught biotechy, his lack of a rigorous scientific education does seem to limit his desire to learn and argue the science involved. Add to that his tendency to skew and color the article to support his point of view. Case in point, he states that squalamine efficacy was inferior to lucentis when in fact it was comparable if not better in IV trials at higher dosing. The failure of course as we know was the delivery method, not the molecule.
Also pretty clear he didn't dig to deep before writing the article (which I think is why he's hedging his usual bombastic style) virtually all of what he wrote is just cut and pasted generalizations biased by his experience with Genaera.