% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

ImmunoGen, Inc. Message Board

dr.vinmantoo 106 posts  |  Last Activity: 15 minutes ago Member since: May 18, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Up 12% pre-market !!!!!

    by jay_scott27 May 26, 2016 8:55 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo 15 minutes ago Flag

    {{90,000 shares..a .4 day is 3600 dumbssa. that's more then you have in your savings account lol.}}

    But PPHM longs always say that their losses due to the dramatic and long-term PPHM stock price decline aren't real because they haven't sold. That means your gains aren't real either until you sell. So, did you sell yet or are you holding on in the hopes of making more money? Tell us so that now so when PPHM stock price drops again you won't be claiming after the fact you sold and locked in your gain.

  • Reply to

    Semi-serious question for the Bashers

    by jeff4iam4 1 hour 7 minutes ago
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo 19 minutes ago Flag

    Very serious and important question for the longs. Why do you think/believe Bavi is the best and most important immune modulating agent in the world when it has failed time after time in human trials? What are the possible negatives aspects of its MOA, especially compared to the strategy of direct modulation of immune cell activity like interfering with the PD-1/PD-L1 receptor/ligand interaction?

  • I did read one of the "key" comments highlighted on the IhuB board, where King touts the targeting of PS and disses the approach of companies who target the receptors that interact with PS and directly contacting and modulate immune cells, ala successful the PD-1/PD-L1 immune. The guy is either totally clueless or a snake oil salesman, possibly both.

    The anti-PS approach as used by Bavi is the wrong approach and there are multiple reasons why that is so. I challenge some longs to explain why they think Bavi will succeed but to also provide reasons why it might fail.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 26, 2016 12:05 PM Flag

    Biopharm is definitely off the deep-end. Reading his or her never ending stream of nonsense is both sad and amusing.

  • Reply to

    New to PGNX......

    by noonangf1225 May 20, 2016 2:22 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 26, 2016 11:58 AM Flag

    {{ Thank you, bagholder....Call me stupid or whatever, but I often have trouble downloading for read the reports.}}

    I didn't call you stupid, nor did I call you any names, but your hero has no problem attacking others doing so.

    {{I'm genuinely sorry if that is offensive to some. Cordioally}}

    Nothing offensive about it and nobody took offense at your question. I didn't understand the point of it.

  • Reply to

    New to PGNX......

    by noonangf1225 May 20, 2016 2:22 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 25, 2016 8:02 PM Flag

    {{Pssuoff is right}}

    Pssuoff is a vermin rtroll. That screen alias fits him or her perfectly. Take a look at the kind of #$%$ the person has posted before commenting on it.

    {{ hide behind your computer like a little nerd..}}

    You mean like Pssuoff, who comes here and posts lies, attacks and nonsense?

    {{angry at anyone who you can pick on...}}

    I am not angry at all. I just don't suffer fools gladly, hence my response to Pssuoff.

    {{your just a punk !!!}}

    It is "you're" a little punk, not "your".

    {{BTW sewers have been very good to me}}

    I am pleased you found your niche working from home.

    {{I have people like you digging them for my business.}}

    Right, whatever you say.

    {{you think your last post makes you sound smart because you can parrot another post.}}

    I didn't parrot any post. I asked what you meant by the word "looser". Maybe in your circle asking a question about a misuse of a word makes one look smart. It sure as hell means nothing of the kind in mine.

    {{grow a pair.}}

    I am quite content with the ones I have so no need to add an additional set.

    {{be nice to people asking what seems like silly questions to you}}

    I didn't understand the point of the question, but told the person they should be easily able to find out.

    {{some people are learning as they go along..BE HUMBLE !!!!}}

    If someone asks me about the science or my opinion about the stock, I will gladly help. I haven't bragged about anything.

  • Reply to

    New to PGNX......

    by noonangf1225 May 20, 2016 2:22 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 23, 2016 5:17 PM Flag

    ""AN ANGRY LOOSER !!!.""

    What's a looser? That person wasn't looking for ideas. That person accurately said PGNX had no debt, so if they have cash it came from 1) some previous stock issuance (easily found), 2) milestone payment (easily found) or 3) Relistor sales (easily found).

  • Reply to

    New to PGNX......

    by noonangf1225 May 20, 2016 2:22 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 23, 2016 12:02 PM Flag

    telecominvest, right on the money. I love it when angry little ignorant trolls like this pssuoff emerge from their fetid sewer to emit their noxious odors then depart. It provides comic relief.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 23, 2016 1:41 AM Flag

    Where is the article published?

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 23, 2016 1:40 AM Flag

    commonfodder, I wonder why the PPHM longs haven't flocked here to explain why my comment isn't accurate.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 22, 2016 1:36 PM Flag

    Commonfodder, you are right on target as so many Bavi failures begins to paint a picture. It always shocks me how many people don't realize that cell line and mouse models are poor predictors of success in human clinical trials. You need to show efficacy there, but that is a very low bar compared to human trials. The basic mechanism of how Bavi acts provides clues to why it might not be effective, especially compared to the PD-1/PD-L1 disrupting approach.

  • Reply to

    New to PGNX......

    by noonangf1225 May 20, 2016 2:22 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 22, 2016 1:28 PM Flag

    You just noted that PGNX had no debt so why do you suggest a major loan agreement? How does a company build a cash reserve without debt? Surely you can figure that out.

  • Reply to

    Roche joins the party

    by coolhandlucy007_007 May 18, 2016 4:25 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 19, 2016 10:53 AM Flag

    Bavi has shown no efficacy as a single agent. Figure it out.

  • Reply to

    Roche joins the party

    by coolhandlucy007_007 May 18, 2016 4:25 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 18, 2016 10:54 PM Flag

    Why would BP need Bavi, a drug that has failed in every clinical trial to date?

  • Reply to

    Buying shares

    by jay_scott27 May 17, 2016 1:41 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 17, 2016 5:38 PM Flag

    There has been around 5 million total shares traded in a week. There is no way that spells a lot of accumulation.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 12, 2016 12:40 AM Flag

    {{I do not claim to be extremely versed in medicine and realize there are many who are far superior to me in knowledge on at least the iHub not so much.}}

    I am glad you don't falsely claim to be extremely versed in medicine. There are NO experts on the IHub board. I like to read it and laugh as what the so called experts post. You made comment that you were 100% certain Bavi would succeed. That is funny too.

    {{As for your statement "What are you talking about? Did Bavi + chemo fail in mice like it failed in humans?", Bavi did not fail in humans. In every trial conducted it showed an improvement over the historical placebo arm...even the pancreatic trial showed some improvement, although it was not by a large factor. The trials may have not met their endpoints or show statistical significance, but they all showed some to flat out say Bavi failed is a bit misleading. }}

    I asked for any trial where Bavi showed statistically significant improvement. There are NONE. You can tout all the small improvements you like, but that won't cut it with the FDA, which I assume you are hoping PPHM can do. That spells failure to date.

    { As I said before, in time you will be proven wrong. You claim you are not wrong, but I believe you will be proven wrong in time.}}

    Nothing I said is wrong so there is nothing for me to be proven wrong. I said Bavi is a long shot but I wouldn't bet on it. I also said stranger things have happened.

    {{The scientific process doesn't always end after the first test...sometimes you need to run numerous tests and then it proves or disproves your hypothesis. I will wait. Less}}

    You don't understand the scientific process. Hypothesis, experiment, data collection then adjust hypothesis. Repeat. You don't prove anything. The hypothesis is partly consistent or fully consistent with the experimental parameters examined, or shown to be wrong.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 12, 2016 12:25 AM Flag

    Jeff, I see why you coming to the wrong conclusions now.

    {{First, I have a BS in Civil Engineering, but also have the equivalent of two degrees in class units as I also enjoyed studying other sciences while in school. An engineer is a scientist in the sense that we study and utilize scientific principles in our work and even do scientific research.}}

    Engineering is a fine profession and it takes a lot of intelligence to be successful in it, but it is NOTHING like being a scientist doing biological research, Engineering is very precise because you know the strength of materials needed to build, the stresses likely to be encountered so that structures can be built to survive. All biological research is based on at best partial knowledge as there is so much we don't know. The discovery of microRNAs a few years ago and their important role in gene regulation, development and chromosome structure/function was totally unexpected. Moreover, cells are able to adapt to disruptions by using different compensatory pathways as well as to mutate/alter gene expression to overcome blocks to cell progression. No matter how much you know or think you know, any good scientist knows they must adjust their models as new data arises.

    {{What I mean by nature is that science is my life, I love the field and I absolutely love medicine. I wanted to be a medical doctor, but my first wife shot that down as she was selfish and thought it was more important to house and feed her and our two kids than spend 11 years through school and I was forced to choose a different field with 5 years as the time frame to complete my degree. I still enjoy medicine though and I read a lot to stay updated. }}

    I am glad you loved medicine, but being an MD wouldn't prepare you for scientific research. The training is very different. Your training in engineering is not only useless for doing or understanding biological research, it could be detrimental to your understanding.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 11, 2016 12:13 PM Flag

    {{Wow- ducky is still here quacking - why??? What is the point? Go enjoy life a little and let it go.}}

    Ah, the typical pphm long response, insult others and avoid dealing with facts.

    I enjoy life each and everyday. I don't enjoy seeing people being sold a bunch of fantasies and long shots possibilities as sure fire investment successes.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 11, 2016 2:02 AM Flag

    Jeff, I will continue.

    {{I am a scientist by training and by my I am not flying completely blind here.}}

    I have no idea what scientist by nature means. Just what exactly is your area of expertise, that is what area of science are you trained in, and what are you working on now? I am a research scientist in academia, and have been one for 30+ years. You will forgive me for being blunt but nothing you have posted remotely suggests you are a scientist by training. No scientist would ever declare that they have 100% faith in a combination treatment that has ZERO human clinical trial data, like you posted about Bavi plus immune modulators. I see nothing but blind faith in all your posts.

    {{I see a lot of promise...and yes I understand that it needs to be proven...why we do trials. I am in the camp that believes Bavi trials to date showed improvement and that all three major trials were not all flukes...or that shananagins were going on with the data.}}

    What three major trials are out were completed where Bavi showed efficacy? I am talking about rigorous trials that showed statistically significant improvement. I haven't seen any.

    {{And maybe the I/O combos are still to be proven}}

    Absolutely freaking correct.

    {{but Bavi in mouse chemo combo studies so far have correlated well in human clinical studies}}

    What are you talking about? Did Bavi + chemo fail in mice like it failed in humans?

    {{I have belief that they will do so with I/O as well. We will see. Hope they will partner soon to prove this....but it will not be overnight.}}

    Maybe so, but most likely not. There is a lot of competition and PPHM isn't exactly bargaining from a position of strength.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 11, 2016 1:48 AM Flag


    {{Well DrV, everybody has their opinion.}}

    Yes, but not all opinions are equal. Some opinions are mere fantasies, like PPHM submitting a BLA based on Sunrise or Sunrise plus the corrupted phase II trial in NSCLC, whereas other opinions are based in reality.

    {{Although some of what you write may have merit, I do believe you are wrong with most and will eventually be proven to have been wrong. Not immediately, but in the coming months and years.And I am banking on it that you are wrong}}

    Nothing of what I said is wrong. Why don't you point out specifically where I am in error.

    {{Blind faith and all as you would likely believe I am basing my opinions on. I really do hope I am correct and you are wrong, not just because I make a few extra bucks, but because maybe there will be a lot of cancer patients that can get a little extra time, maybe for some a lot more time.}}

    Oh please, not the "for the sake of cancer patients out there" canard. Yes safe and effective cancer treatments are needed. However, but if something isn't effective, then it is best pushed by the wayside so money, and time can be better spent, and patients can move onto more promising treatments.

5.63-0.02(-0.35%)1:28 PMEDT