|
|
Post by u1682002 on Mar 8, 2015 10:10:31 GMT -5
I am trying to do some projections of Afrezza revenue for my own investment decision in MNKD based on the initial patient response that we all heard so far. Currently I own quite significant number of shares. The question is whether or not to add more.
I found the following discrepancy about the diabetes statistics in US from different sources:
America Diabetes Association website: ~1.25mil JDRF website: as many as 3mil
Can anyone on this board explain this difference? I got a gut feeling the T1 initial Afrezza user ratio will grow much faster and higher than T2. This leads me to wonder what kind of numbers one can project.
One related question is the cost for each T1 diabetes patient: I heard a number ~2k/year cost for Afrezza. My understanding this is just for prandial insulin. How about the basal insulin cost? Any other cost? I just want to get a idea the total cost for T1 diabetes patient per year. The affordability is also important factor for the adoption ratio of this new drug. It will be even better if some one happen to have some statistics about the insurance coverage ratio for these T1 patients and willing to share.
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 8, 2015 10:12:37 GMT -5
Exactly what are your numbers referring to and when?
|
|
|
|
Post by u1682002 on Mar 8, 2015 10:23:58 GMT -5
I just googled the internet about US T1 patients and found these numbers from ADA and JDRF website. Both numbers are listed on their 1st page of their website. The number from ADA is for 2012 US T1 number. There is no specific year for JDRF number.
|
|
|
|
Post by savzak on Mar 8, 2015 10:41:26 GMT -5
I think the 1.25 number is diagnosed, known type 1's. I also think your feeling that T1's will grow faster is wrong. The T2 population should continue to grow faster.
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 8, 2015 11:05:11 GMT -5
Different organizations will have different ways of collecting their data. Some of the best are CDC for the US and WHO for global. Here's one link for CDC. It's not as informative as one I found in the past, and it doesn't break down T1 vs T2. I will say this - when I was in training (not that long ago), the factoid to memorize was 90% T2 vs 10% T1. Nowadays, it's roughly 95% T2 vs 5% T1. www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/statsreport14/national-diabetes-report-web.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 8, 2015 11:19:27 GMT -5
Very strange - I used to be able to Google something like "diabetes statistics" and come up with some very useful facts from CDC or NIH - I believe circa 2011. Now, everything points to the "fluffy" fact sheet I linked in the above post. It's like someone is sanitizing the data.
|
|
dave
Newbie
Posts: 10 
|
Post by dave on Mar 8, 2015 12:41:54 GMT -5
a bit off topic, but I agree, google searches are not as quick or accurate as near as two years ago....the advertising is overwhelming the facts you pursue
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 8, 2015 12:44:59 GMT -5
I don't think it's Google. I think the government has dumbed down what they report. It used to be a cut and dry fact page. Now they have all these flowery pictures and half the facts. Oh well.
|
|
dave
Newbie
Posts: 10
|
Post by dave on Mar 8, 2015 13:05:30 GMT -5
Oh, no doubt. It would not surprise me if institutions, especially the govt. modify or redesign information to bog down or defeat basic searches. In the past, it was never given a thought. Now? surely. (and, "dont call me shirley")
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 8, 2015 13:15:26 GMT -5
I don't think it's Google. I think the government has dumbed down what they report. It used to be a cut and dry fact page. Now they have all these flowery pictures and half the facts. Oh well. In other words, you get much less information in a new page format that's designed to make you feel good about it. Yep, sounds like our typical government progress report. It's really bad with the EPA, with "secret science" employed to change policy...but that's really getting off-topic. I wonder if those flowery "feel good" page formats will eventually turn up at the SEC website? |
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 8, 2015 13:30:46 GMT -5
I don't think it's Google. I think the government has dumbed down what they report. It used to be a cut and dry fact page. Now they have all these flowery pictures and half the facts. Oh well. In other words, you get much less information in a new page format that's designed to make you feel good about it. Yep, sounds like our typical government progress report. It's really bad with the EPA, with "secret science" employed to change policy...but that's really getting off-topic. I wonder if those flowery "feel good" page formats will eventually turn up at the SEC website? That is exactly what I was trying to convey! Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 8, 2015 15:06:36 GMT -5
Well Liane, now that the FCC has taken control of the Internet...
Yeah, I've (half jokingly) now become a bit of a paranoid conspiracy theorist. :-)
We'll see if this post gets through and stands, and I am not worried about you moderators.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Mar 8, 2015 15:35:05 GMT -5
Well Liane, now that the FCC has taken control of the Internet... Yeah, I've (half jokingly) now become a bit of a paranoid conspiracy theorist. :-) We'll see if this post gets through and stands, and I am not worried about you moderators. Seen any black SUV's parked out front of your place lately, esstan? |
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 8, 2015 16:12:39 GMT -5
Too funny...
first, I moved to a PC from my iPad, and could not find my post...
thinking Liane just pulled my post and was toying with me.
Second Baba, I was about to reply to your comments about black SUV's...
something innocuous along the lines that today they are a bit more sophisticated than that (utility vans, etc.)
When I clicked reply, I was not eligible to reply to the thread. OK then, I tried again.
Boy, was I really beginning to worry until I noticed that I was not logged in to Proboards.
I always thought I would not see a 'reply' button available when not being logged in.
Whew- I started to suspect that you were all in on the conspiracy! :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 8, 2015 16:15:50 GMT -5
Maybe baba would do that - but not moi!
|
|
