Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- From: outsider <outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 09:05:10 -0600
On 12/24/2010 8:56 AM, Susan wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
On 12/24/2010 9:30 AM, Janet wrote:
I didn't see any "substantive points." Unless you consider references to
Kevorkian and "death panels" and so forth to be "substantive." Wendy
addressed the factual reality behind us of the drug. The article was a
piece
of pure propaganda that didn't even make a faint effort to do so.
You have to wonder why, too, with so many objective, non inflammatory,
informative articles written on the subject, that one was chosen?
Susan
And we're on a roll again!
.
- References:
- OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- From: Ellen K.
- Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- From: W. Baker
- Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- From: Janet
- Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- From: Ellen K.
- Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- From: Janet
- Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- From: Susan
- OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- Prev by Date: Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- Next by Date: Re: Good and bad news depending on your viewpoint
- Previous by thread: Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- Next by thread: Re: OT (?): FDA reverses approval of Avastin on grounds it doesn't provide "sufficient" benefit
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
