| Lost password
112 users onlineYou are not loggend in.  Login
collangase
 1
 1
04/20/01 02:06
Norm

not registered

04/20/01 02:06
Norm

not registered

collangase

I can not find anything about collagenase at any FDA site. The only information I can find is the article concerning Stoney Brook. Even Biospecifics does not keep us informed of where the studies are. If anyone has any information please post here.

06/14/06 02:43
Anon

not registered

06/14/06 02:43
Anon

not registered

Is collagenase a hoax

Yes, I think collagenase is a hoax! If it were real it would be out by now. Some clown made it up and told us a story. Believe it not! You may never live long enough to see this collagenase treat you.

06/14/06 02:10
bb

not registered

06/14/06 02:10
bb

not registered

well...

you might like to read this, for whatever it's worth.
From the company who bought the rights to collangenase(sp) otherwise known as AA4500.

scroll down to read pages 17 thru 23:

http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/14/142/142125/items/194294/UBSPres.pdf

06/14/06 02:13
Randy H.

not registered

06/14/06 02:13
Randy H.

not registered

We win either way

No, Collagenase is no hoax. It exists and it works. jim suspects that the whole thing is just to get inventor's money, and that's all. That the owners don't really intend on bringing it to market, just to sell tickets to a show that will never open. Kind of like in "The Producers". That take is a bit cynical for me, but jim is certainly entitled to an opinion that can't be proven either way.

Meanwhile, because Collagenase has been delayed for so long, the only *other* known noninvasive option (NA) has been given the opportunity to come into prominence. If all the CHS had jumped on this product, NA would not be as needed. However, Collagenase needed to get by the FDA, which takes time and money. NA has needed to get by a *huge* amount of misinformation held by leading CHS in the US. Eaton's "Reality Check" at September's gathering of CHS should do a lot to dismantle these false NA notions held by his fellows.

The broad acceptance of NA will both help and hurt any momentum to get Collagenase past the FDA. First, it will show that without a *doubt* both doctors and patients *desperately* want a first line, non invasive treatment protocol for Dups. That's one of Collagenase's selling points. On the other hand, NA is likely to be a much less expensive treatment option than Collagenase. The major reason for that is that the cost of Collagenase will be set based on how much it cost to being it to market......which is a lot. They need to recoup the huge investment. However, Collagenase may well prove more powerful and adaptive than NA. NA has it's limitations and Collagenase may be able to overcome them.

NA on the other hand is overcoming it's obstacle for no money at all. How? Well, it's been blogers right here who got the job done for free by educating patients, not MD's or the FDA. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, but consider this. If there were no promotion of Collagenase (which definitely included this site), there would be no NA available in North America.

We win either way.

 1
 1
collagenase   definitely   expensive   acceptance   overcoming   concerning   prominence   corporate-ir   interesting   noninvasive   Biospecifics   misinformation   treatment   desperately   information   opportunity   limitations   investment   collangase   collangenase