Member Info for The.Italian

also worth remembering that diane savory, incoming NEC, worked for super dry for 22 years and was a main board director.

really excellent news.!

would agree with that 100cups.hadnt thought of cop in this context.

perhaps a function of the current £240m m/c.at that level it gets harder to move the needle and significant news may be required.in its absence inevitably some will sell out of boredom and a variety of other reasons.doesnt affect the long term prospects,but may make the journey harder.imo

seems a little simplistic to me to say revenue is irrelevant if no profit.i think it is a little more complicated than that.

by the currently unfiltered one.where is the factual evidence to support that accusation?

yes albert its all a bit odd.ive noticed a lot of posts getting deleted(not just on here)which seemed to me to be entirely innocuous,whereas some pretty repellant and misleading posts seem to be tolerated.cant fathom the reasoning.

ok strangler.appreciate the response,thanks.

exactly,dgdg.

afternoon albert.dont worry im not expecting one.just pondering the profundity of gob's latest offering. fatuous in the extreme in my opinion!.

strangler have you managed to find the evidence to support your statement that realnetworks have been selling down? still waiting.

morning bucolic.he is not going to address the point is he.

straw man reply.usual tactic.doesnt address the issue.clearly has no response to the actual point raised.

does anyone else think it odd that the currently unfiltered one,in all his strident declamations that the efficacy of med 3000 will only be proved by a placebo controlled trial,or even one involving a non - interference control group,fails to mention that the fda trial,which has been agreed with the fda,which will have had all the previous trial results etc, is going be a randomised,open label trial,neither placebo controlled nor double blinded.seems that is good enough for the FDA,but apparently not good enough for the currently unfiltered one.seems a great deal of pointless and misleading speculation going on to support his narrative.

also interesting and perhaps somewhat ironic,that the currently unfiltered one, who has been stridently proclaiming that erexon would only help in a very limited sphere, now seems to be anticipating a veritable stampede from rival manufacturers hell bent on bringing their own products to market as quickly as possible. couldn't make this rubbish up imo.

nonsense.fum don't have to prove anything. the burden is on the body trying to prove equivalence and it is not the simple matter that the unfiltered one is desperately trying to pretend it is. complete garbage im afraid.

this is the point ss.he is deliberately trying to simplify the criteria which are required to prove equivalence.it must surely be obvious to anyone reading the material posted, that the equivalence criteria are actually extremely involved and technical.has the currently unfiltered one ever claimed to be qualified in chemistry and/or biology?genuine question.

once again the currently unfiltered one is taking a deliberately superficial and facile approach to what is undoubtedly an extremely complex subject.he seeks to suggest that it is a very simple matter to demonstrate equivalence. note that menthol can also exhibit vasoconstriction characteristics, which is perhaps not what the ed sufferers want to hearhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7154148/

in order to keep up the spirit of those posters who like to post links to commentaries which have some, at best, tangential relevance to fum, but which can, given a sufficient degree of unprincipled casuistry, be distorted to present a negative view of fum's prospects, i append the folowingfhttps://www.drugwatch.com/fda/510k-clearance/ if were inclined to present a distorted view of its import, i would suggest it means that a very large percentage of 5010(k) approvals result in recalls. it doesnt actually say that, but i could, if i wished, suggest that rivals using the equivalence route to approval are very very likely to be subject to recalls .that's nonsense, of course, but so are the desperate attempts of others to draw comparisons to other product whose history may seem to reflect negatively on fum's potential.the reality is the each product will be assessed on its own performance going forward and the marketing and advertising claims will be carefully structured to reflect that potential.

thank you mel.im clear now.