afrezzauser, so were you diagnosed as type 2, then did not take any medication, and then became a type 1? If not what was the progression?
afrezzauser, my comments are to make the same suggestion to you that I made to a poster, doctor.stockpicker, who posted he is a doctor in Oklahoma who takes care of a lot of diabetics. I have never gotten a response from this doctor. My suggestion (and I do not think it is unique) is for type 2 diabetics who are not on any diabetes drug, or are on metformin to begin on Afrezza alone at meal times to dampen the blood glucose excursions and possibly (likely) bring the a1c into an acceptable lower range over time. Yes, I mean discontinue the metformin, which is primarily acting on the liver to reduce the steady state level of glucose. The Afrezza, acting as real insulin, will chemically message the liver to reduce the glucose output during meal time digestion periods.
At least start on this procedure to verify blood glucose level improvements before putting type 2 diabetics on a harsh side effect drug like metformin to bring down glucose output from the liver, or even an injected insulin analog like lantus. I am hopeful that a lot of these research labs and research hospitals will run some of these type of trials with Afrezza and report their results at the many diabetes conventions.
afrezzauser, I have some comments on this to add to your inputs, but I don't have time for a full reply right now. I will give you a complete reply in the next day or two to this particular thread you have started.
afrezzauser, I posted this last night, but it did not appear. During the trials did you always inhale the Afrezza just as you started your meal, or did you sometimes inhale some minutes after your meal started? I was listening to Al Mann some weeks ago either in a video or conference call say he thinks a better time to inhale Afrezza is a few minutes after a meal has started. I think he said up to 15 minutes after a meal has started is all right.
afrezzauser, during the trials did you always inhale the Afrezza just as you started your meal, or did you sometimes inhale some minutes after your meal started? I was listening to Al Mann some weeks ago either in a video or conference call say he thinks a better time to inhale is a few minutes after a meal has started. I think he said up to 15 minutes after a meal has started is all right.
It is in Maryland, and I would like to know if anyone on this board was there or communicated with someone who heard him speak. Besides Al Mann I know Afrezza will be discussed on some of the panels, because Dr. Klonoff, a leader on some of the panels, has written favorable information on Afrezza in the November issue of the Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology that is on the web.
google Sticking Point: Sanofi’s Diabetes Franchise Is Crucial to Sorting Out a Mess to see how critical Afrezza is to Sanofi's diabetes success. It is critical . Also the remarks by the WSJ article writer indicates no understanding of diabetes or how insulin works in the body. The only thing these people seem to understand is inhalation, and that severely limits their ability to communicate helpful information to lay people and even diabetics.
Google diabetes technology conference 2014 al mann , and the first link is a pdf of the agenda. The entire conference has a lot of good speakers and panel discussions with Al Mann as a keynote speaker. I noticed that Dr. Klonoff, who is a big supporter of Afrezza in his DST Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology in the current November issue, is a panel leader of several panels at the conference. This will be November 6 and 7.
radgray68, there is no need to change your mind or opinion of Orelli. He falls in the category of an often wrong but never in doubt biotech/pharma writer. They don't announce they have been wrong, but they modify their positions gradually to write they were right later. These kinds of writers cover a field that is full of unknowns with lots of money bet on both sides of secret trials that end suddenly with -- it meets or does not meet primary/secondary endpoints. I feel with all the money bet on drug companies and trials, these types of writers with the power of the pen sometimes are corrupted
lakers_w, this is the first article I can remember in which Orelli has said positive things about MNKD. Frankly without his saying he has modified his stance on Afrezza and MNKD, it appears he is thinking more positively about MNKD after hearing the latest November 3 MNKD conference call. There is no getting away from the position that Orelli has likely changed his mind enough about MNKD to start thinking with a somewhat more open mind about the company and Afrezza. I notice, however, he did not mention that MNKD said Afrezza will have a prominent place in the Sanofi November 20th presentation on Sanofi's new products it will be introducing soon.
dtanger, just notice Levisohn does not comment on MNKD unless some analyst or hedge fund has made some negative comment first. Ben Levisohn just follows up and posts it on Barron's. He is just a vessel to carry someone's water.
Ben Levisohn always writes negative stuff on MNKD in his short Barron's articles. It has been that way for over a year, because he is just playing along.
anson10x, this one has pretty simple ground rules that were followed, I think. CHK has needed to reduce debt. CHK was not putting a lot of development money into the properties that were sold. CHK had too many land assets and did not have the capital needed to work all its assets to maximum value. It does not matter that the CHK land assets in that part of the Utica and Marcellus were very good for ng/ngl & some oil. It matters that it was not a core asset for CHK, and CHK did not have the money for short or intermediate term development of these properties in any case (besides ng prices are not high). SWN wanted the Utica and Marcellus properties to expand, and the SWN CEO was quoted as having said SWN pursued CHK for these properties. You see a higher priced transaction as a result of these basic factors -- SWN wanted them quite a lot.
CHK is getting a big chunk of cash and will reduce its debt a tremendous amount, and it can show how it is on its way to having its debt one day rated investment grade (its stated goal in presentations anyway). SWN has some very good new and very productive properties to develop and to grow a lot. The issue for SWN will be how it handles its new debt load. Will it sell mostly bonds, or will it sell stock to raise the new, permanent money? It needs to do something, because it will owed BAC about $5B for a while at bridge loan rates.
This deal was about the short/intermediate term debt reduction at CHK, and the intermediate/long term growth of SWN with some very good ng/ngl properties. CHK did not have to sell, and SWN had to bump up its price paid to get the properties. Cramer is probably crying that SWN got the better deal, because his trust owns SWN. He probably wants to minimize any further drop in the SWN stock price, because he knows a secondary is probably coming. He might also be trying to hold up the price so he can sell his SWN without much further loss to him. I am sure you know Cramer is manipulative.
Apple could have chosen GLW for is sapphire for its watch if Apple had paid the prices GLW wants. Corning used to make sapphire, and got out of that business long ago. Will Apple use GLW for sapphire now that GTAT is history?
This may have been written about already, but I haven't the time to scour this entire board. The obvious short covering Wednesday (today) on decent volume was nice to see two days in a row, but the stimulation for some or much of the hedge funds' covering some of their shorts might be driven by a reason that is not so obvious. Many of you may have had this same feeling in the past when the market has dropped on your stocks, and you sell some of your very profitable winners instead of your losers that should be sold instead. You want to lock in your profits, and the hedge funds want to lock in their year before it slips away. In the case of hedge funds that are short MNKD and have some big profits, they could easily be covering not due to news just ahead but to lock in whatever profits they have before some other funds try to lock in their profits. They could be covering their profitable shorts rather than unloading a lot of their unprofitable long losers (so they don't look so bad and also keep their bonuses for the year). Of course the hedge funds who want to lock in their profits don't care so much the higher bids of the price to cover, but there are plenty of funds who shorted MNKD too low and who see their losses mounting by the hour as other hedge funds are covering. So they have to get on the short covering treadmill, because the MNKD stock price is not going lower. It is a fun thing to watch, and I hope it lasts a while.
factspls88, yes, I saw her very early last week on CNBC, and she was calling for an incredible decline in stocks with a 10 yr treasury rate of 1%. Yes, 1%. She went off the deep end at some point, and still says not to worry too much.
I could see at various online broker sites a lot of shares available to short, but as the day has gone on I could see them used by some shorters. Looks like they have tried to hold down this big climb today, but it has not worked so far. Just be on the lookout for some big shorts trying to dump in this last hour. There do not appear to be anymore short shares available, but the shorts may not have fired all their ammo yet.