Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2016 13:46:45 GMT -5
The success of a company should not be completely reliant on another different entity. The sour deal with Sanofi gave up all the cards. Dexcom, google, Paul Allen or anyone else for that matter is not going to come and save Mannkind. The core management is extremely weak. Still waiting for a turn around. Mike C. is a breath of fresh air. But he's only one person and can't expect him to pull a miracle. While a miracle is needed I really do believe he is that guy. He is a one man army. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jul 26, 2016 19:17:15 GMT -5
The success of a company should not be completely reliant on another different entity. The sour deal with Sanofi gave up all the cards. Dexcom, google, Paul Allen or anyone else for that matter is not going to come and save Mannkind. The core management is extremely weak. Still waiting for a turn around. Mike C. is a breath of fresh air. But he's only one person and can't expect him to pull a miracle. Miracle Mike can pull it off. Oh, wait, that was the name of a headless chicken. Maybe we could say he needs to pull off magic. Magic M... oops, going somewhere else... never mind. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2016 19:40:57 GMT -5
The success of a company should not be completely reliant on another different entity. The sour deal with Sanofi gave up all the cards. Dexcom, google, Paul Allen or anyone else for that matter is not going to come and save Mannkind. The core management is extremely weak. Still waiting for a turn around. Mike C. is a breath of fresh air. But he's only one person and can't expect him to pull a miracle. Miracle Mike can pull it off. Oh, wait, that was the name of a headless chicken. Maybe we could say he needs to pull off magic. Magic M... oops, going somewhere else... never mind. Hopefully you are not going near Magic Mike. Some old the old folks around here might have a heart attack |
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Jul 26, 2016 19:54:16 GMT -5
My understanding is glucowise is still in development but they are another great example of companies working towards non-invasive CGM technology. Now the two big gorilla's are Verily and IBM and they will force change in how diabetes care is managed. Right now, I am not aware of anything better for mealtime control than afrezza, nothing. I sure hope Mike is calling both IBM and Verily every day, maybe twice a day to do a deal. IBM can pick and choose the CGM vendor or vendors for 24/7 real-time monitoring but they need afrezza. With the Verily/Dexcom deal Verily may not have that flexibility but Andy Conrad should be doing a deal direct with MNKD and if I were Kevin Sayers I would be trying to do a deal asap with MNKD to try and lock them up while MNKD is cash poor and a pps of $1. Dexcom needs to do a deal now before CGMs are being sold in Walmart for $50 and I hope Mike has enough sense not to do an exclusive with Dexcom but is calling IBM and a few others who are getting into the cloud based medical services business who are all targeting diabetes. I've never quite understood what the logic is of statements like above "they need Afrezza". Afrezza is available on the market. What you are talking about is a business relationship, correct? Whey would IBM, Verily or Dexcom need to buy or invest in Mannkind. Even if Afrezza is a unique product in its ability to provide great control for PWD... why does that make a business case for a company wanting to be in health analytics forming a business partnership with a drug company? Do you think Verily and IBM's model will be to acquire best in class drugs for most major drug indications to become big pharmas themselves? Seems unlikely. Seems much more likely that they'd want to remain relatively agnostic and open to relatively low level R&D efforts with any and all comers in the pharma segment. They need Afrezza because they are developing predictive models and need the reliable and predictable PK profile which Afrezza brings. They are working to develop 24/7 monitoring and dosing services which is why the Adcom vote was very important. Part of the model development is profiling on an individual basis where in the beginning you enter or take a picture of what you are eating. The system will figure out carbs and calories, database it and track how your BG re-acts. After several months IBM Watson will be pretty good at guessing what you are eating based on the rise in you BG over time, day of the week, favorite foods etc and will be able to predict if and when you may need a second dose of Afrezza. Diabetes is the perfect disease for this type of monitoring and modeling. So, if IBM locks up afrezza on some type of exclusive preferred supplier deal Verily will not be able to compete on cost or with current RAAs. Now, five years ago very few were seeing where this new type of managed care was going but it is now very close to reality. Deals like the CVS, Totaldoc, Oscar and IBM deal is the beginning. The huge question is does MNKD have the cash to make it to the finish line and can Mike do the deals with IBM, Verily and a few others on MNKD's terms. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jul 26, 2016 20:17:12 GMT -5
I've never quite understood what the logic is of statements like above "they need Afrezza". Afrezza is available on the market. What you are talking about is a business relationship, correct? Whey would IBM, Verily or Dexcom need to buy or invest in Mannkind. Even if Afrezza is a unique product in its ability to provide great control for PWD... why does that make a business case for a company wanting to be in health analytics forming a business partnership with a drug company? Do you think Verily and IBM's model will be to acquire best in class drugs for most major drug indications to become big pharmas themselves? Seems unlikely. Seems much more likely that they'd want to remain relatively agnostic and open to relatively low level R&D efforts with any and all comers in the pharma segment. They need Afrezza because they are developing predictive models and need the reliable and predictable PK profile which Afrezza brings. They are working to develop 24/7 monitoring and dosing services which is why the Adcom vote was very important. Part of the model development is profiling on an individual basis where in the beginning you enter or take a picture of what you are eating. The system will figure out carbs and calories, database it and track how your BG re-acts. After several months IBM Watson will be pretty good at guessing what you are eating based on the rise in you BG over time, day of the week, favorite foods etc and will be able to predict if and when you may need a second dose of Afrezza. Diabetes is the perfect disease for this type of monitoring and modeling. So, if IBM locks up afrezza on some type of exclusive preferred supplier deal Verily will not be able to compete on cost or with current RAAs. Now, five years ago very few were seeing where this new type of managed care was going but it is now very close to reality. Deals like the CVS, Totaldoc, Oscar and IBM deal is the beginning. The huge question is does MNKD have the cash to make it to the finish line and can Mike do the deals with IBM, Verily and a few others on MNKD's terms. How could any deal with IBM possibly prevent Verily from doing research with Afrezza and developing similar predictive technology. Any company that were a device manufacturer or analytic company can design trials and have patients use any FDA approved drug. If it were possible for MNKD to get "locked up" with IBM what prevents Novo from locking up Toujeo with a partnership with Verily? As soon as IBM or Verily do any deal with any drug company such as you suggest I'd view this in entirely different light, but I just don't see it making business sense. Is there a single past example of where a drug company has some sort of a deal that restricts the supply of their drug unless used with some 3rd party's technology or device (for business not medical reasons)? Quite frankly I really don't even see, based on what I know of Watson and having taken computer science AI classes in graduate school, where that would be a good starting point for something to predict the body's response to insulin. Watson is about inferring structure out of huge amounts of unstructured data. We already have very good models of human physiology... witnessed by the fact that Mannkind and other companies are writing scientific papers based on an FDA approved simulation of insulin response physiology. Seems it would be foolish to start with generic AI trying to infer what is happening. I don't think the analytics of verily or IBM are in the best position to address a device that helps on individual manage their insulin use... I'd bet that is the same companies and research groups that are doing artificial pancreas or the referenced simulation technology that are in the best position to address that... after all, a device to help with dosing is exactly the artificial pancreas even if a version were constructed that chimed to tell you to inhale rather than initiating an SQ bolus. Where Google and IBM type analytics would come into play could be uncovering as yet unrealized connections between diseases, drugs, lifestyles, etc. that might only be seen looking at data for large populations... assuming it is ever feasible under our patient privacy rules for them to get access to such large pools of data. There are some clever ways of dealing with the privacy/security challenges, but even those technological solutions would likely require changes in our privacy laws that would be difficult to get passed. It's a brave new world, but there are reasons everything in clinical medicine goes very slow. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jul 26, 2016 22:03:10 GMT -5
Oops... meant Tresiba when I mentioned Novo above, not Toujeo.
|
|
|
|
Post by patten1962 on Jul 26, 2016 23:30:20 GMT -5
Google Life Sciences is a partner with Dexcom. Some people have speculated/wondering if they may have a connection with MannKind? Honestly, no one knows for sure. Myself, I have had many ideas on who RLS is: 1. Google Life Sciences, 2. Perle Bioscience, 3. AMGEN, 4. Microsoft, 5. Dexcom, Paul Allen. One thing we do know about RLS is that it's Seattle-based. That rules out everyone on your list except Microsoft, which to the best of my knowledge has not shown any interest in pursuing bioscience. Allen, on the other hand, has. He's Seattle-based and has the money, plus the person running the company has previous connections with him. Sorry, not sure about the Seattle statement. Just because we think RLS is in Seattle does not mean it is. Where is the plant? I think Seattle is a smoke screen. This RLS thing is going to be big. RLS is already a company, they just took on this name to fool the competition whoever that may be. |
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Jul 27, 2016 5:43:42 GMT -5
"Quite frankly I really don't even see, based on what I know of Watson and having taken computer science AI classes in graduate school, where that would be a good starting point for something to predict the body's response to insulin. Watson is about inferring structure out of huge amounts of unstructured data." Where IBM is going is more than inferring knowledge from unstructured data. Watson medical is looking to replace how medical care is delivered via the cloud with remote monitoring, diagnostics and care. Tracking BG is pretty simple but what happens when something goes "odd". Thats where the AI power of Watson comes into play. Can Watson replace the endo? I think we are going to find out. Moreover, IBM wants to become a full service provider where they are an insurance company and medical service all wrapped into one. If they can there is huge money in this. Back in 1980 IBM made a huge mistake by not locking up PC DOS. Lets see what they do this time. Why do they want to compete with Verily on an even play field who is trying to do the same thing if Andy Conrad can get out of his own way.
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jul 27, 2016 7:37:55 GMT -5
"Quite frankly I really don't even see, based on what I know of Watson and having taken computer science AI classes in graduate school, where that would be a good starting point for something to predict the body's response to insulin. Watson is about inferring structure out of huge amounts of unstructured data." Where IBM is going is more than inferring knowledge from unstructured data. Watson medical is looking to replace how medical care is delivered via the cloud with remote monitoring, diagnostics and care. Tracking BG is pretty simple but what happens when something goes "odd". That's where the AI power of Watson comes into play. Can Watson replace the endo? I think we are going to find out. Moreover, IBM wants to become a full service provider where they are an insurance company and medical service all wrapped into one. If they can there is huge money in this. Back in 1980 IBM made a huge mistake by not locking up PC DOS. Lets see what they do this time. Why do they want to compete with Verily on an even play field who is trying to do the same thing if Andy Conrad can get out of his own way. I seriously doubt IBM wants to become an insurance company and a medical provider. IBM are a technology and services company so want to sell Watson services and high profile projects demonstrate what can be done. Their interest is in getting pharmas to buy Watson services to develop drugs, not to develop drugs themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Jul 27, 2016 8:04:37 GMT -5
Same to be said for mnkd's agnostic approach to cgm technology.
|
|
|
|
Post by prosper on Jul 27, 2016 8:56:46 GMT -5
You have brought up what could be an amazing tool for Afrezza preliminary titration. Having read YMB and here for many years it seems to me that substantial reasons for failure to keep patients on A were not only the small sample packs, but the inability to build confidence and successful results of A.
A rental/lease, possibly supplied by doctors or definitely by pharmacies, or, if we could afford it, included with sample packs for 30-45 days of use.
Just imagine if everyone that tried A were to be successful in titration.
|
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Jul 27, 2016 12:26:47 GMT -5
I've never quite understood what the logic is of statements like above "they need Afrezza". Afrezza is available on the market. What you are talking about is a business relationship, correct? Whey would IBM, Verily or Dexcom need to buy or invest in Mannkind. Even if Afrezza is a unique product in its ability to provide great control for PWD... why does that make a business case for a company wanting to be in health analytics forming a business partnership with a drug company? Do you think Verily and IBM's model will be to acquire best in class drugs for most major drug indications to become big pharmas themselves? Seems unlikely. Seems much more likely that they'd want to remain relatively agnostic and open to relatively low level R&D efforts with any and all comers in the pharma segment. They need Afrezza because they are developing predictive models and need the reliable and predictable PK profile which Afrezza brings. They are working to develop 24/7 monitoring and dosing services which is why the Adcom vote was very important. Part of the model development is profiling on an individual basis where in the beginning you enter or take a picture of what you are eating. The system will figure out carbs and calories, database it and track how your BG re-acts. After several months IBM Watson will be pretty good at guessing what you are eating based on the rise in you BG over time, day of the week, favorite foods etc and will be able to predict if and when you may need a second dose of Afrezza. Diabetes is the perfect disease for this type of monitoring and modeling. So, if IBM locks up afrezza on some type of exclusive preferred supplier deal Verily will not be able to compete on cost or with current RAAs. Now, five years ago very few were seeing where this new type of managed care was going but it is now very close to reality. Deals like the CVS, Totaldoc, Oscar and IBM deal is the beginning. The huge question is does MNKD have the cash to make it to the finish line and can Mike do the deals with IBM, Verily and a few others on MNKD's terms. Even if what you suggest (a deal for exclusive access to Afrezza) were possible or practical, which I very much doubt, how does it benefit Mannkind? IBM is going to pay so much that it will more than make up for ceding the entire rest of the market? Not to mention that it seems tremendously unethical to say you can't use this drug if you don't buy this device that is not actually necessary for using the drug effectively. |
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Jul 27, 2016 12:33:13 GMT -5
Paul Allen. One thing we do know about RLS is that it's Seattle-based. That rules out everyone on your list except Microsoft, which to the best of my knowledge has not shown any interest in pursuing bioscience. Allen, on the other hand, has. He's Seattle-based and has the money, plus the person running the company has previous connections with him. Sorry, not sure about the Seattle statement. Just because we think RLS is in Seattle does not mean it is. Where is the plant? I think Seattle is a smoke screen. This RLS thing is going to be big. RLS is already a company, they just took on this name to fool the competition whoever that may be. You think Matt lied about where the investors were based? Don't think so. It was just all he was allowed to say. And why would it be necessary to fool the competition about who you are? More likely they just don't want to be bothered until they're ready to launch something. Whether RLS will turn into something big is something we'll have to wait to see. Depends on what they're working on and whether it pans out. |
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Jul 27, 2016 19:26:56 GMT -5
"Quite frankly I really don't even see, based on what I know of Watson and having taken computer science AI classes in graduate school, where that would be a good starting point for something to predict the body's response to insulin. Watson is about inferring structure out of huge amounts of unstructured data." Where IBM is going is more than inferring knowledge from unstructured data. Watson medical is looking to replace how medical care is delivered via the cloud with remote monitoring, diagnostics and care. Tracking BG is pretty simple but what happens when something goes "odd". That's where the AI power of Watson comes into play. Can Watson replace the endo? I think we are going to find out. Moreover, IBM wants to become a full service provider where they are an insurance company and medical service all wrapped into one. If they can there is huge money in this. Back in 1980 IBM made a huge mistake by not locking up PC DOS. Lets see what they do this time. Why do they want to compete with Verily on an even play field who is trying to do the same thing if Andy Conrad can get out of his own way. I seriously doubt IBM wants to become an insurance company and a medical provider. IBM are a technology and services company so want to sell Watson services and high profile projects demonstrate what can be done. Their interest is in getting pharmas to buy Watson services to develop drugs, not to develop drugs themselves. I don't think IBM's target market is BP nor do they want to be a BP. IBM wants to make money and they see the medical services industry as a huge market which they can transform with technology. With Watson they can sell to doctors, they can sell to the CVS's, they can sell to insurance companies and in the long term control the entire supply chain by offering the best medical care at the lowest cost. Target number one for IBM is diabetes; its deep; its wide; and it perfect for the technology revolution with CGMs; the cloud; their new profiling modeling; Watson; and two new drugs Tresiba and afrezza. With the CVS, Totaldoc and Oscar partnership they have made a first step and now Medtronic is scrambling to get the next best CGM. Here is a high level example of some of the IBM thinking but its all about the money and we are at the beginning of the medical revolution. IMO this is 1995 and the internet all over again in the medical service industry. If there is something better than afrezza for mealtime control I would like to know but I am not aware of it and the same is some what the same for Tresiba. IMO the two big stories out of ADA76 were afrezza and IBM Healthcare here is some of their high level thinking fortune.com/ibm-watson-health-business-strategy |
|
