I own quite a few less shares than you! I agree that the future is bright, but the main risk for HBV is that the suppression of the viral particles might not result in a functional cure.
Does anyone on the board know if that has been established? I wouldn't compare HCV to HBV, either--HBV has several potent drugs directed against it, whereas HCV was only treatable with PEGinterferon and Ribavirin--different situations.
Delivery to sites other than the liver will be great, if they can get there.
Exactly--so how does the company's technology fit into this? They make the synthesis gas--so if the plant they are supplying does not use their synthesis gas, but chooses to instead get COG from somewhere else, one has to ask, "Why?". Downstream from the synthesis gas is just Fisher-Tropsch chemistry (I believe--correct me if I am wrong). It just made me a bit nervous: I had nice gains, it was in a tax-free account, so I took my profits. I'll stay tuned and may jump in later.
Best wishes, all. I took my profits. I worry that they are using COG instead of their own technology. If their thing works so great, how come they have to do that? Also, I read in C&E News that methanol was being shipped to China from the West coast--cheaper, evidently, than trying to deal with the #$%$ infrastructure out in the boonies. Also, say they get a contract to build a plant in Pak--they don;t have the capital to do it!
I will keep my eye on this company--I hope they make it!
Dear dmorfey: I believe that the chimp had been treated previously, but was not currently undergoing treatment. I also believe that entecavir was used in the clinical trial because it would be unethical to rely on sole therapy with ARC-520.
Dear mdx00z: I must respectfully disagree. Yes, we do need scientific proof. Otherwise, we base our decisions on speculation and paranoid fantasies. I think one needs to carefully examine each of the points you make about the reputed dangers of fracking and evaluate their relevance compared to the alternative. By carefully, I mean that you should realize that injecting sand and some rather ordinary chemicals into rocks more than a mile underground does not in any way affect the quality of the water in the water table that you or I would access. See the comment below about septic systems. The environment is so important, I wonder why you squander your energy on non-problems, while letting real problems get worse and worse. It may feel good to rant and shout foolishly, but its not beneficial and you risk a backlash when the populace realizes you were: dead wrong on GMOs, dead wrong on microwaves, dead wrong on nuclear, dead wrong on fracking, dead wrong on biofuels, dead wrong on wind power---sheesh! Do you ever sit down and think what you seem like to someone who is not your mother? A fool. A self-indulgent fool..
Interesting reading at the eia dot gov site. They are predicting that nat gas in storage will be about 15% below average by the time injections stop in November. Meanwhile the number of rigs drilling for natural gas continue to decline, down to about 330. One little cold snap this winter and the market will jump nicely....
Quantum can buy it back, not ZAZA. And won't hey spud and drill a bunch of wells, and then not complete them until after the two year period? It's like a baseball slugger getting a contract that pays extra if he hits 60 homers--he'll be benched at 59....
ZAZA's deals are so complicated: I can never understand them! What does it mean that they get the first 15 wells in the first two years? And that they can 'participate' in Q's interest in those wells? They have 30,000 acres, and 10,000 more? How encumbered are they, what proportion is in these joint ventures? I was happier with Chesapeak, fer cryin' out loud! This stock is my leading loser: I keep holding on......
Anyone care to speculate which company would be interested in ARWR? Intermune must be getting the C-suites of Big Pharma all hot and sweaty--I can just see 'JB' reaming out his CFO for not lining up something big to match Roche's deal! My bet is on Gilead.
Interesting article in Reuters--wells, especially older ones that were fracked in the early days of the development of fracking technology, can be re-fracked with good results. I wonder if this applies to Line's wells?
That is a fair question--hparch was un-necessarily rude (and didn't answer your question). As I understand it particles of the HBV virus continue to be made, even after entecavir therapy, although these particles are not infectious because the entecavir obliterates their ability to make DNA. However, the particles overwhelm the immune system and prevent it from controlling the infection. The idea is that stopping the production of these particles will help the immune system get ahead of the infection, leading to clearance of the infected cells (hence the sharp increase in liver enzymes--the 'flare') and a 'functional cure'. We'll see--but we have passed the first few hurdles.
With every hurdle surmounted, this stock gets a bit less risky. Still a long way to go, but now we know that it more or less works in humans, without any obvious acute toxicity. Will it perform well in a larger population? Will it result in a functional cure? Is their patents status good? Can they make it in sufficient quantities? As each one of these hurdles falls, the stock will be come ore valuable. Miss one of them, and look out below! Ain't this fun?
Sentiment: Strong Buy