|
Post by lennymnkd on Jan 31, 2018 17:53:57 GMT -5
What about avoiding first pass hepatic metabolism/ were most drugs effects are mitigated leading to larger doses .
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jan 31, 2018 18:00:46 GMT -5
What about avoiding first pass hepatic metabolism/ were most drugs effects are mitigated leading to larger doses . Yes, that is true for some drugs. Of course how that lines up against the amount wasted with inhalation probably varies from API to API. Another complication in which way efficiency would tilt is that for small molecule drugs much of what is inhaled but doesn't reach deep lungs would eventually end up in stomach, so it could be absorbed eventually, unlike insulin which would be broken down if ingested. So it likely varies API to API.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Jan 31, 2018 18:21:47 GMT -5
Nearly every oral medication has a falloff in efficacy while passing through the gastrointestinal tract And injectables are affected by fat thickness at the injection site, along with other factors. It's time to stop comparing Afrezza to RAA and I hope MannKind will eventually remove the RAA equivalency chart from the label.
Besides, it's really the CONSISTENCY of Afrezza's delivery which makes it better for controlling blood sugar levels.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jan 31, 2018 18:31:06 GMT -5
so regarding pulmonary hypertension and efficacy. your blood is not getting oxygenated enough. the pressures in the pulmonary (artery) and veins, which brings the oxygenated blood back from the lung are high. causing.... congestive heart failure in a sense. shortness of breath. tired. nothing will get to the target area, the pulmonary veins and arteries faster than technosphere.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 19:52:56 GMT -5
@kastanes... have you suggest he contact investor relations to try to set up an interview? I once asked Michael if he would like to ask him anything, he wrote, he prefers to ignore him.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jan 31, 2018 20:01:37 GMT -5
@kastanes ... have you suggest he contact investor relations to try to set up an interview? I once asked Michael if he would like to ask him anything, he wrote, he prefers to ignore him. Perhaps you should have worded it "do you want to tell him anything" Mike recently invited AF to visit I believe. I'd sure prefer spending time with SO than AF... if gun were to my head to do one or the other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 20:27:39 GMT -5
I believe an interview between Osborne and Castagna would be beneficial for MannKind. It would set expectations appropriately for Afrezza and Technosphere future applications. That could lead to potentially additional funding MannKind is desperately in need of.
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Jan 31, 2018 20:29:42 GMT -5
NOT ... it would only benefit the big O ... giving him some credibility. So Mike C is right by just ignoring him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2018 3:47:01 GMT -5
I can tell you Osborne would be objective and would not inject any false statements into an article. Inviting AF to view and discuss Afrezza manufacturing and costs is a mistake in my opinion.
I know most here despise Osborne, however, he does accurately model cash and scripts; a concern that prevents share price from appreciating. If Osborne could ease Wall Street's concerns, Michael should grant Osborne an interview.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Feb 1, 2018 12:30:44 GMT -5
I can tell you Osborne would be objective and would not inject any false statements into an article. Inviting AF to view and discuss Afrezza manufacturing and costs is a mistake in my opinion. I know most here despise Osborne, however, he does accurately model cash and scripts; a concern that prevents share price from appreciating. If Osborne could ease Wall Street's concerns, Michael should grant Osborne an interview. How do you know what SO will or will not inject into his articles? Unless you are SO then that is merely your personal opinion and nothing else. He is trash and not worth the time of day. And I don't think he influences Wall Street.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Feb 1, 2018 12:35:46 GMT -5
I believe an interview between Osborne and Castagna would be beneficial for MannKind. It would set expectations appropriately for Afrezza and Technosphere future applications. That could lead to potentially additional funding MannKind is desperately in need of. An interview written by SO could lead to additional funding and set expectations appropriately? That's just ludicrous. You're putting him WAY too high on a pedestal with that statement. And you're fluffing him WAY too much lately. Let it go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2018 12:37:13 GMT -5
I can assure you he would give Michael an opportunity to spell-out his vision while asking questions for the paranoid investors like myself.
Do I believe it will happen? I give it a less than 50% chance that it will.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Feb 1, 2018 13:21:13 GMT -5
Mike has talked about his vision numerous times, most recently at the NobleCon14 investor conference. Investors and potential investors can watch his presentation for free. SO is simply not needed.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 1, 2018 13:42:46 GMT -5
I can tell you Osborne would be objective and would not inject any false statements into an article. Inviting AF to view and discuss Afrezza manufacturing and costs is a mistake in my opinion. I know most here despise Osborne, however, he does accurately model cash and scripts; a concern that prevents share price from appreciating. If Osborne could ease Wall Street's concerns, Michael should grant Osborne an interview. How do you know what SO will or will not inject into his articles? Unless you are SO then that is merely your personal opinion and nothing else. He is trash and not worth the time of day. And I don't think he influences Wall Street. One can often safely assume that past behavior is an indicator of future behavior. I don't follow SO closely but have read some of what he's written because of the discussions here. I have not seen any untrue facts (short of one mistake he subsequently corrected) in his writing about MNKD. I don't follow him because he basically is just summarizing info that most of us already know regarding scripts and financials. I do agree with you that he doesn't likely influence Wall Street.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Feb 1, 2018 13:44:55 GMT -5
I can assure you he would give Michael an opportunity to spell-out his vision while asking questions for the paranoid investors like myself. Do I believe it will happen? I give it a less than 50% chance that it will. I find that difficult to believe, considering that SO has demonstrated a will to suppress opinions that differ from his OR his habit of misrepresenting responses. For example, I once wrote that if MannKind were to launch a significant national marketing campaign, they could reach 3k scripts per week. At that time, MannKind chose NOT to begin TV marketing, but that fact never stopped Osborn from incorporating my remark into his graph and labeling it MnHoldem's prediction.
None of my protests on his articles were ever posted. They were rejected by Seeking Alpha as "personal attacks" on the author when I'd merely attempted to correct his error. MannKind has still not launched a significant national DTC campaign and are strictly marketing to targeted territories at this time.
I cannot believe that you think he wouldn't pull the same tricks on Michael Castagna by taking comments out of context in his articles and then make certain that Seeking Alpha blocks him from rebutting a Spencer-authored misrepresentation that makes it way into one or more of his articles? If so, then you haven't done your due diligence. Many others here have posted about SO's tricks.
When it comes to integrity, his track record works against him.
|
|