posted
this was the first stock trade for me. did several months of reading and paper trading that was going good. i had all my strategies ready my account settled yesterday i wasn't going to chase anything then this actc comes along everybody goes bonkers and i threw all my strategies out the window got in at 2.10 today and am now bag holdin. i let my emotions get the best of me. lesson learned
posted
I'm very upset after today's session. I had big expectations after the yesterday's predictions... Now I don't know what to expect from tomorrow. This press conference will take place in the afternoon, I think, after the market is closed anyway. I guess the stock will keep going down. I'd say it would open at around 1.38 if not below. And I thought that I was "way safe"... I'm still holding (like I had other choice)and still hoping that MAYBE we'll have a good day tomorrow. It's Friday and it will suck if it's gonna be like today. I just want a peacefull weekend for once:) What do you think will happen tomorrow?
-------------------- New to the game... but I'm a quick learner. Posts: 71 | From: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
it closed strong, conferance call is at 12 eastern time; so i expect it to go up in anticipation of conf. call.
Posts: 4071 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would look at this long term... it had its breakout run, no more 300% days for awhile.. have to wait for another earth shattering PR. Hold tight, and God speed!
-------------------- Stick with Repo's plan in '07 - FRPT/DKAM! Posts: 6379 | From: PA | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's always a choice Neona. If you believe that it will go down, then sell. The hardest thing about trading in my opinion is learning to cut your losses.
BTW I think it will go up tomorrow.
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doniboy, I didn't have much options though I bought it when it was already too high and based on the predictions that were made yesterday I supposed that I't will eventually go up. It didn't happen. It barely touched 1.70! I couldn't sell because It was waaaay tooo low. There is still tomorrow.
-------------------- New to the game... but I'm a quick learner. Posts: 71 | From: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well yeah, we couldn't possibly sell at 1.60 when we got it at around 1.80-2.0 right? Tomorrow, I guess is the last chance we have to turn it around... Starting Monday this will be considered a long term stock and I'll be oficially burned. I can't afford to keep most of my assets locked in this stock. I need to move fast.
-------------------- New to the game... but I'm a quick learner. Posts: 71 | From: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
Well, it could of been worse. Need to take a deep breath, then go workout. Thought there would be some profit taking, then off to at least three. Now, I just want to see how tomorrow does. GLTA
Posts: 174 | From: Precipice | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
i know that the weekly chart looks ,,well smashing i say smashing , it makes this week look small i would love to retest or blast through 52 week high
-------------------- PREPARE TO BE BOARDED Posts: 742 | From: SOUTH CARRIBEAN | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
not saying im against it or for it , but heres avalid point our friggin stupid azz govt approved the plan B pill today , and abortion has been legal for along time but there hanging on this , what a bunch clowns. there that felt better
-------------------- PREPARE TO BE BOARDED Posts: 742 | From: SOUTH CARRIBEAN | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Repoman75: I would look at this long term... it had its breakout run, no more 300% days for awhile.. have to wait for another earth shattering PR. Hold tight, and God speed!
Impact of new stem cell extraction on WARF patents remains unclear Joe Vanden Plas • Published 08/24/06 Print this article • E-mail this article • Add your opinion Madison, Wis. - The United States Catholic Bishops did not waver, and after some initial signs of hesitation, neither did the White House.
Wisconsin Right to Life, however, is not yet prepared to rule out a new method of deriving stem cells from human embryos that does not destroy embryos, and gubernatorial candidate Mark Green believes it's a promising development.
While various objections still remain, could the fact that this new method of deriving stem cells, which appears to avoid one of the principal objections to existing methods, shift public opinion even further in the direction of new federal funding for embryonic stem cell research?
That's exactly what researchers at Advanced Cell Technology claim to have accomplished, and one of the company's top executives wasted time framing the debate.
"There is no rational reason left to oppose this research," Dr. Robert Lanza, vice president of Advanced Cell Technology, told the New York Times.
Following the announcement, there was widespread optimism that the new method could end the impasse over new federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research. Federal policy now prohibits using any federal money for new lines of human embryonic stem cells, but does not restrict private money.
Even Wisconsin Right to Life and Congressman Mark Green, both ardent opponents of human embryonic stem cell research that requires the destruction of embryos, did not take an immediate stand against the new method.
"We really need to first confer with out scientific experts," said Susan Armacost, legislative and political action committee director for the pro-life organization.
Luke Punzenberger, press secretary for the Green Campaign, said the Republican gubernatorial candidate is encouraged by the news. "He thinks this is a very promising development in stem cell research, and it's clear that we may be able to conduct this research without grappling with some of these signficant ethical questions," Punzenberger said.
New method
Researchers believe human embryonic stem cell research could result in cures and treatments for a range of maladies, including heart disease, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and diabetes. These cells are called "pluripotent" because they can be used to replicate virtually any cell in the human body, but before now they have been derived in a method that required destruction of later-stage embryos called blastocysts.
There are an estimated 400,000 unused embryos available in in-vitro fertilization clinics that supporters of stem cell research say would be discarded if not used for human embryonic stem cell research.
The new method would be performed after the fertilized egg has divided into only eight cells, which are called blastomeres. In-Vitro clinics will occasionally remove one of the blastomeres for diagnostic testing for Downs Syndrome and other conditions. If no defects are found, the remainder of the embryo is implanted in the woman and is capable of producing a healthy baby. Roughly 1,000 such babies have been born without any noticeable harm.
The cell that is removed from the embryo also can be used to derive stem cells, but more testing is needed to evaluate whether it can produce stem cells that are comparable to those derived in existing methods.
If the new method is be confirmed by other scientists, it could be an important breakthrough.
More legal battles?
But what about the legal ramifications, particularly with the stem cell patents granted to the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation? What happens if Advanced Cell Technology attempts to patent its method of deriving s tem cells when WARF not only holds patents for its method, derived by University of Wisconsin-Madison researcher James Thomson, but also a composition-of-matter patent on all embryonic stem cells?
WARF manages inventions by UW-Madison professors and claims United States patents on all human embryonic stem cells in the U.S., no matter where or how they are derived. These patents, which are likely to produce a windfall for the UW, were obtained by WARF after Thomson grew human embryonic stem cells in a laboratory.
Andrew Cohn, a spokesman for WARF, said the new method of deriving stem cells should not hurt Wisconsin's standing as a leader in stem-cell research. He also said WiCell, the nation's first stem-cell bank and a subsidiary of WARF, would be interested in helping distribute stem cell lines derived from this method.
He also said it's too early to tell how the new method would impact WARF's stem cell patents. "We don't even know what they'd claim in their patents, but that's the last thing we're concerned about," Cohn said. "We need time to dissect and digest its full impact."
The WARF patents already are embroiled in a legal challenge. The Public Patent Foundation, on behalf of the California-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, has filed a formal request with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to re-examine three patents held by WARF. The filing contends that WARF patents are restricting scientific research and never should have been granted.
If the WARF patents are upheld, would the organization have the right to make a claim on stem cells derived by this new method? John Simpson, stem cell project director for the Santa Monica-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, believes they would. "They would claim the right to human embryonic stem cell patents derived in this [new] way," Simpson stated.
He also said the new method of deriving stem cells doesn't make the WARF patent a moot point because it hasn't been replicated elsewhere, and the research community still isn't sure how robust it is.
"It's unclear how effective it will be in deriving all the different types of stem cells that are needed [for research]," he said.
Related stories
• Bush vetoes stem cell research bill
• Request to re-examine WARF stem cell patents escalates war of words
• California group says ruling weakens WARF's stem cell patent
• WARF says it's ready for a legal challenge on stem cells
• Human stem cells grown free of animal contamination"
"Stem Cell Breakthrough Won't Satisfy Religious Conservatives Thursday, August 24, 2006 By: Yaron Brook
Irvine, CA--"The researchers at Advanced Cell Technology should be congratulated for their scientific breakthrough," said Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. "But their new method of creating stem cell lines will not stop religious opposition to scientific progress."
In developing a method of extracting embryonic stem cells without destroying the embryo, the team was, in part, trying to address the concerns of those opposed to the destruction of embryos. As the team leader said: "There is no rational reason left to oppose this research."
"But there has never been a rational reason to oppose embryonic stem cell research," said Dr. Brook. "The opposition comes mainly from religious conservatives and is--by their own declaration--based on faith, not on reason. It is based on the irrational belief that a mere clump of cells is a full-fledged human being."
"There is no rational reason to morally oppose this research, and its potential to produce treatments for such diseases as diabetes, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's is ample reason to morally support it.
"It is a mistake to try to appease religious conservatives on this issue. What they are opposed to, fundamentally, is science as such.""
### ### ###
(Notice: Dr. Brook is with the Ayn Rand Institute, not the company -- tex)
"White House Falsely Claims New Stem Cell Study ‘Has Not Been Reviewed By Scientists and Bio-Ethicists Yet’ Today, a new study was published that shows embryonic stem cells lines can be created without the destruction of human embryos. Previously, the White House has said they oppose the creation of new stem cell lines because it involved the destruction of embryos.
In today’s New York Times, White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore said “Any use of human embryos for research purposes raises serious ethical questions. This technique does not resolve those concerns.” This afternoon, the White House changed their story. Here’s Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino:
QUESTION: Any decision to perhaps revisit the President’s position on federal funding for stem cell research, in light of this new development that was published yesterday in the journal Nature?
PERINO: …This study today reported in Nature Magazine has not been reviewed by scientists and bio-ethicists yet, but it is one that the President believes deserves a good look. He is encouraged that there are scientists who are continuing to look for innovative ways to do stem cell research that would not involve the destruction of embryos. And so he is going to listen to folks after they have a chance to review the study, but it does hold some promise that they would be able to do that type of research without destruction of a human embryo.
This is false. ThinkProgress spoke with bioethicist Ronald Green, who is an ethics advisor to Robert Lanza, an author of the study. Green said that in order to be published in Nature, the paper went through a rigourous peer review process, which lasted nearly three months.
The study was also reviewed by bioethicts. It was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Advisory Board of Advanced Cell Technology. Also an independent review board was constituted to scrutinize the study, as required by Massachusetts law.
Digg It!"
check out the link for (at the time) about 60 comments below the story. Pretty good... my favorite is comment #14...
quote:Originally posted by glassman: "It is a mistake to try to appease religious conservatives on this issue. What they are opposed to, fundamentally, is science as such."
messing with insects is much less "controversial"
uhn uhh...ain't you ever seen that movie, The Fly?
lol, I'm liking this more and more...It Bugs Bush!
posted
If I was dying of a disease that could have been cured by stem cell research I wouldn't give a crap what bio-ethicists thought. In fact I am not dying and I still don't care what they think.
Whenever Science battles religion, religion always loses, why do they continue to fight?
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
the Bishop is not agreeing at all... he's saying they are using this unethically in no uncertain terms...
don't be mad at me... i'm just posting it as it comes thru..
i am for this research... the Bishops are just gonna fight this all the way is what i hear them saying.. and? i am familiar with the work... ended at 35 past the hour and it had already stared when i started posting... about 15 minutes total? yes that's press...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The worse thing that can happen to an activist is to win, after that their cause is gone and they have nothing to do...lol You can expect a LOT of crazies coming out of the woodwork to combat this thing, but like Tex said, its all exposure for our company. In fact I guarantee that there are meetings of the mindless going on right now trying to come up with reasons to dislike this new breakthrough. The truth is that they hate science and would rather that we pray for disease to go away.
BTW I am from an extremely Democratic state, but I am an independent and I voted for Bush.
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You guys all realize your not going to get any sleep tongiht right? Thats the only reason I didn't buy it at the eod!!
Posts: 671 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I bought it when it was already too high and based on the predictions that were made yesterday I supposed that I't will eventually go up. It didn't happen. It barely touched 1.70!![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
