Comments on: Artificial Blood May Lead to Very Real Death

By: John Chau

John Chau — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:32:14 +0000

Seriously?
You’re trying to be convincing here
At least use correct terms so you look like you know what you’re talking about
“fake blood” “cash cow”
And just how realiable are your sources
Just how much have you researched?
Did you even know there are TWO types of artificial blood?
Because you only seemed to have mentioned
Really are you just trying to be bias or do you truely believe in what you wrote?

By: Anon

Anon — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:54:18 +0000

11. You’re incredibly pretentious.

By: John Smith

John Smith — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:38:27 +0000

P.s: #6 should have stated “What grounds does Dr Wolfe have? “

By: John Smith

John Smith — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:37:19 +0000

1. The article is poorly written
2. Do not put undegrad. student as a second author, for it makes you look bad.
3. Not all “HBBS” are created equal
4. Some of the products examined are actually not blood substitutes but hemoglobin based O2 carriers…
5. Public Citizen sued FDA in 2006, now the group co-authors and article?
6. What grounds does Dr Wolfe has to suggest that MCC in South Africa is not aware of risks involed? Perhaps Dro Sidney Wolf will be kind enough to sue MCC.. He certainly has plenty of experience with FDA…
7. Before a blood substitute becomes a “cash cow”… hundreds of millions of dollars of investors money must be spend on R&D.
8. The risk of heart attacks was not tripled for RR was 2.71
9. Another ridiculous thing that Natanson mentions is that more animal studies should be done. If sponsor has already seen the toxicity why does he need more trials showing the same thing?
10. Why does not table 2 have a total number of patients in “treatment” and “control” arms?