I keep looking for medical and scientific negatives from the published contributions of Mayo Clinic (primarily Dr. Tefferi), and I can not find much. No cancer drug is perfect, and all drugs have some side effects or patients where the drug does not work. Considering the power of this drug (unheard of remissions with reasonable safety), the negatives are minimal.
To me, on a scale of 1 to 10, this looks like about an 8 or better. The market-makers gyrations will eventually go away as the dominant force, and Mayo Clinic's successful trials (good medicine, good science) will send the stock price trending upward for a considerable time. Time is on Geron's side, because they have a powerful advocate in Mayo, and a Nobel Prize in the Imetelstat science, plus a solid balance sheet and potential deep pocketed partners in the wings.
Obama is one of our greatest presidents. He has faced right-wing obstruction approaching the night-of-the-long-knifes in 1934.
BEDFORD, Mass. , June 25, 2014 /CNW/ - Hologic, Inc. today announced that a groundbreaking study published in the June 25, 2014 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), found that Hologic's 3D Mammography (breast tomosynthesis) screening technology finds significantly more invasive cancers than a traditional mammogram. The researchers also found that 3D mammography reduces the number of women called back for unnecessary testing due to false alarms. That reduces anxiety, as well as health care costs.
Maine###1--***My "crystal-ball" tells me that good things will happen to Imetelstat, and, ultimately, to Geron. I operate with the best information that I can isolate, and try to interpret it, with the future in mind.***
You can argue with this, if you wish to. The concept of the "crystal-ball" only means that we all try to prepare for the future (sometimes we get it right, and sometimes we get it wrong).
Maine###1--Your basic mistake is that you do not understand that investing in stocks is about one's perception of the future, or "conjecture" as you put it. There is an element of art and an element of science (economics is the dismal science). Obvisously, a "crystal-ball" is a mystical concept, that we all try to use. My "crystal-ball" tells me that good things will happen to Imetelstat, and, ultimately, to Geron. I operate with the best information that I can isolate, and try to interpret it, with the future in mind.
It seems to me, that no matter where the short-term gyrations of the market takes us, Mayo Clinic has already told us that Imetelstat is an important drug and perhaps a great drug. Most people do not believe that Geron will go it alone, and believe that Mayo is in-charge of the eventual path that Imetelstat takes. That means that Geron will merge or end up with a major partner. Suggestions are: JNJ, Novartis, Celgene, Roche, Gilead.
There seems to be nothing to stop Imetelstat from becoming a standard treatment for several types of blood cancer (especially MF). Also, there is great promise as a research-pipeline drug for many types of cancer, including cancer stemcells.
Mayo Clinic is the driving force here. Geron will likely merge or partner with a big pharma company, but they are in no hurry. They have enough cash, and a Nobel Prize drug.
New partner is coming, and knowledge of Imetelstat is becoming more universal. The stock is way underpriced, and Mayo is in control of the medicine and the patients in remission. "Strong hands" are about to take over.
Maine###1--If you are truly long, then take a rest. Mayo Clinic is the "super hero" here, so Imetelstat will evolve according to their wishes and schedule. We will likely see additional gyrations in the stock price; not to worry. Your intestinal contortions may be painful, but they do not help the rest of us, who happen to be completely sane.
Keep an eye on Gilead & Geron. They have common interests in blood cancer drugs. Geron has succeeded, while Gilead is an also-ran.
With Mayo running the Imetelstat show, and also running interference for Geron with the FDA, "Everything is coming up roses". There will be a new partner, IMO, because Mayo wants it that way. JNJ, Novartis, Celgene, Roche and Gilead all have very deep pockets, and ongoing blood cancer projects.
My background is in optics. I also have large investments in both GLW & AAPL. Gorilla glass makes more sense to me, and I don't see the logic otherwise. Perhaps you have some insight.
Geron Set To Explode As FDA Releases Partial Clinical Hold On Imetelstat Myelofibrosis Trial by Stock Doctor
This article was published on Mon, Jun. 30, 10:47 AM ET (Seeking Alpha)
"There are a lot of disadvantages of Sapphire versus Gorilla Glass. It's about 10 times more expensive. It's about 1.6 times heavier. It's environmentally unfriendly. It takes about 100 times more energy to generate a Sapphire crystal than it does glass. It transmits less light which...means either dimmer devices or shorter battery life. It continues to break. I think while it's a scratch resistant product it still breaks and our testing says that Gorilla Glass [can take] about 2.5 times more pressure that it can take...Sapphire on. So when we look at it, we think from an overall industry and trend that is not attractive in consumer electronics."
The conclusion becomes that the current price of Geron is far too low, and has nothing to do with medical science or medical outcomes. Mayo is the dominant influence (FDA conclusions, sound medicine), and controls the future of Imetelstat, which looks very promising. Geron will go along with whatever Mayo decides, including the choice of partners. This is a 3-way project, IMO: Mayo, Geron, new partner.
I believe that when Geron switched its emphasis from hESC to Imetelstat, they thought they had a good product that could be brought to market in a reasonable time. Mayo Clinic's success has gone far beyond what Geron thought possible. Mayo now controls the continuing clinical trials, the relationship with the FDA, and has a vested interest in Imetelstat. Geron is really in a very strong position, since Mayo it trusted by all. In addition, Geron is not totally out of the stemcell business (distributions, cancer stemcells, etc.).
Sentiment: Strong Buy
The proof that you are wrong: Mayo Clinical trials, telomeres, cancer stemcells, strong balance sheet, big pharma interests. Still, you are right about the risk, since Imetelstat is one-horse-show (but what a great show).
The Case for GMO's is Very Solid:
Food Fight: The Case for Genetically Modified Food "Agriculture needs to do better".
Genetically modified crops, says agro-research czar Roger Beachy, receive an unjustified shellacking from environmentalists
Mar 22, 2011 (excerpt)
Today consumers are willing to pay more for crops that are labeled “organic” or even “GM-free” because they view them as more sustainable. How do you think GM crops can help make agriculture more sustainable?
In my opinion, the GM crops we have today already contributed to sustainable agriculture. They have reduced the use of harmful pesticides and herbicides and the loss of soils because they promote the use of no-till methods of farming. Nevertheless, there is much more that can be done. As you know, agriculture and forestry account for approximately 31 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, larger than the 26 percent from the energy sector. Agriculture is a major source of emissions of methane and nitrous oxides and is responsible for some of the pollution of waterways because of fertilizer run-off from fields. Agriculture needs to do better.
We haven’t reached the plateau of global population and may not until 2050 or 2060. In the interim, we must increase food production while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and soil erosion and decrease pollution of waterways. That’s a formidable challenge. With new technologies in seeds and in crop production, it will be possible to reduce the use of chemical fertilizers and the amount of irrigation while maintaining high yields. Better seeds will help, as will improvements in agricultural practices.