first of all thank you for your cogent and very helpful posts to this message board. i purchased some Aurora Bio-Sciences stock back in 1999 (before they were bought out by Vertex). since then i have become somewhat familiar with the Hep-C players and the comments from the various analysts about their treatments (both potential and real).
it seems to me that lots of analysts and pharma columnists (meaning people who should know better) minimize (or leave out altogether) the SVR12 and SVR24 results with respect to GILD's drugs. the 100% (or near) "cure" in ELECTRON back in Apr 2012 turns out very differently by Nov 2012 when SVR12 results are tallied.
why should ABT's SVR12 results be judged inferior by so many compared to GILD's Nov 2012 SVR4 results?
also, i have not seen a single analysts or pharma columnist who has commented on the change in results from GILD's ELECTRON SVR4 in Apr 2012 compared to SVR12 in Nov 2012. why is this?
do you see a possible bias here or am i reading more into it than i should?