|
Recommend this Post
|
Ignore this User
| Report Abuse
|
jbcguy, nicely said , but here's the
by:
i_think_i_ken
Long-Term Sentiment: Strong Buy
|
05/05/06 01:36 pm
Msg: 6391 of 6737 |
Long of the short of it since you were able to slap him in such a short and simple manner, i shall elaborate>
To Bradadvisory and other lying bashers:
So how much is MSON paying you to pump their stock? Or are you paid by a fund trying to press EDAP down to buy it cheaper? That would be the smarter strategy.
Let's try getting some of your facts straight on the prostate cancer side where MSON can't compete and the doctors know it, then you can pump MSON on their other ultrasound products. They might have something there except their last conference call was so gloomy death might as well have been presenting. Oh, and their CEO has so many options shareholders should be well diluted before it’s all done. And they haven't proven any market for their ultrasound products yet. Now back to the FACTS.
You wrote:
MSON market 100 times larger than Prostate Cancer - WRONG!
MSON’s 84% HIFU success rate in reducing prostate PSAs below 0.2 (April 6, 2006) is better than EDAP’s WRONG!
EDAP’s first undergo a separate TURP ~ WRONG!
If the $4b wound market is 100 times larger, then prostate cancer is only a $4m market. Something tells me you're full of crap. Or you just can't add.
People may not want to invest in MSON because they like to make outright lies in their releases. 84% is not even close to the best data reported. Pretty much every HIFU company who tried prostate cancer has better results than that. EDAP does not require a TURP - the faq you listed says that clearly. If you want to pump - don't link to a site that shows you're lying for pay.
MSON's 84% is not published or peer reviewed. It wasn't even accepted as a poster at the EAU. In fact, the only data at the EAU was EDAP's, MSON didn't have anything. It is also a short period of follow up but they won't say how short so probably less than a year which is nothing. No doctor will jump at those numbers.
EDAP has multiple studies showing, BY BIOPSY, which is much more accurate than PSA, up to 93% SUCCESS at up to 5 YEARS. These are peer reviewed and published in major journals. They also have numerous studies showing EDAP has lower side effects than MSON. This might be because the MSON ultrasound is a compromise for both imaging and treating. Even their own doctors have complained about the poor quality of imaging compared to EDAP's unit, and this means MSON will have worse treatment results. Either way, in terms of clinical credibility, EDAP is the only company to have it.
As to TRUP, neither company requires it. This is another outright lie by MSON but they're that desperate to market they'll say anything. EDAP's own studies show treatment under both protocols to be equally effective. The US trials for EDAP specifically say there will not be a TURP prior. Note that MSON doesn't even have a trial running for first indication right now.
The TURP is done for two reasons: the size of the prostate or patient comfort. Either company will do a TURP before if the prostate is very large - this is so the HIFU head can reach all of the tissue. The reason the TURP is done commonly in Europe is that the patient only requires a catheter, on average, for 3 DAYS following the procedure if they choose the TURP before. Since the total side effects of EDAP mirror those of a TURP, this doesn't add anything to the procedure in terms of discomfort to the patient. If the patient doesn't do the TURP, he wears a catheter for up to 30 days as he will if he chooses a substandard device like the Sonoblate. This is from the studies reported in peer reviewed articles.
Oh, and every published comparison between EDAP and MSON has concluded that the EDAP device is superior in efficacy, safety and desirability to the hospital and the patient.
|
|
Message Thread [ View ]
|
Profanity filter is Off [ Turn On ]
|
|
|
|
|
| EDAP Snapshot |  | | EDAP 8.08 +0.85 +11.76% | | | | | |
|
|
