Hindsight is infallible. Being good involves recognizing when you’re lucky & pounding the table w/ conviction. Not investment advice. U win some, U learn some
Joined May 2023
- Tweets7.3K
- Following3.2K
- Followers3K
- Likes2.4K
Pinned Tweet
The recent apologia for former CBER Director Vinay Prasad by Dr. Anish Koka is a masterclass in narrative framing over scientific precision. $QURE 🧵
LabRadar ✡️ retweeted
Ok now that is something I actually find extremely offensive. I challenge you to find someone else here who more thoroughly and repeatedly highlights the risks associated with the stocks they choose to discuss. I *constantly* repeat the risks of stocks I am involved in. I do it in all caps, bold, red font, highlighted. Repeating the same disclaimers over and over and over. At the start of pitches, in the middle, and at the end. Over and over and over. This is EXTREMELY important to me.
"But you don't seem even consider the people who you post to aren't high income". Fuck you. Look at the screenshots of me LITERALLY WARNING SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE ABOUT THE RISKS THIS VERY MONTH.
And for the record, I've been broke too. Investing in biotechs is how first I became not broke.
You can say what you want about my investing ability (while making an absolute fool of yourself in the process). I have 1,000 haters like you who will say I suck no matter how many triple digit % years I produce. But discussing risk is something I take EXTREMELY seriously and PERSONALLY, and I'm not letting you spew absolute fucking nonsense to the contrary here.
Read a small sample of the receipts. What more could you possibly ask for? As far as I'm concerned the only other option would be to simply discuss no stocks at all. Then I'd be as useless as you.
It seems your dispatch system is completely broken @Uber_Support @UberEats. My food sat on a counter for an hour before a driver was assigned. The app is trapping me in a bot loop and refusing a refund for a $41 meal that arrived cold. How am I supposed to pay for this failure?
1
411
LabRadar ✡️ retweeted
A lesson we all should take seriously, thank you @ShawnEni.
Jews supported Hitler. One in particular, a Jewish Lawyer wrote most of the anti-Jewish laws that progressively tightened the noose around their necks. Those laws, to a law-following German, proved how evil the Jews were.
Jews in the US have long supported the Democrat party. For anyone who can see, that is already ending badly. Islam is the future of the Democrat party.
Jews that think they can safely support the likes of Mamdani or El-Sayed and the Democrats of today are just as deluded as Max Naumann.
Wake up before it is too late.
Let me introduce you to a fellow named Max Naumann.
In 1934, Naumann, a German Jew, urged fellow Jews to support Adolf Hitler. He defended the Nazi regime even as it persecuted Jews, and actually petitioned Hitler for the right of Jews to fly the German flag.
In 1935, the Gestapo dissolved his organization and threw him in prison, where he attempted suicide. He died of cancer in 1939, before the Holocaust, but not before discovering how little his loyalty to the Nazis was worth.
I'm not comparing Abdul El-Sayed to Hitler. I'm questioning the idea that a Jewish endorsement is, by itself, evidence of what's best for Jewish safety.
From the Hellenizing Jewish elites of ancient Jerusalem to Jewish supporters of Iran's Islamic Revolution, we have examples throughout our history of Jews aligning themselves with political movements that ultimately turned against them.
Their motivations differed, as did the consequences. But there's a lesson in Max Naumann's story that's worth remembering.
Being Jewish has never made anyone immune to being catastrophically wrong about what's good for Jews.
@PatinkinMandy @GadSaad
LabRadar ✡️ retweeted
$MRNA Investors Should Brace for More Whiplash
Even after its sharp fall, the drugmaker’s stock price assumes wild successes
wsj.com/health/pharma/modern…
LabRadar ✡️ retweeted
$MRNA "Reduced the risk of recurrence or death by 42%" AKA patients are still dying of cancer AKA it's not a cure.
Surprise! Your vaccine company you were bidding up to insane levels doesn't do the thing you thought it did and now you're left with a company trading at 100x peak revs.
Down a solid 33% from this post. But who’s really counting? It’s just getting started. $MRNA will go back to where it belongs at $30
Adding to my $MRNA short. Valuation is largely attributed to meme AI algo slop. Valuation is out of touch with reality on data with no confirmatory evidence. Should see a 30-40% haircut in next couple months
8
645
LabRadar ✡️ retweeted
Adding to my $MRNA short. Valuation is largely attributed to meme AI algo slop. Valuation is out of touch with reality on data with no confirmatory evidence. Should see a 30-40% haircut in next couple months
$MRNA back to $30
$MRNA with the single most hilarious possible outcome in this study. EFS HR 0.58. Down the the hundredth, EXACTLY what *NEO*-adjuvant treatment with pembro yielded against adjuvant pembro (the nerfed comparator $MRNA studied against) in SWOG S1801.
What does this mean in English? $MRNA’s drug is showing the exact same benefit versus adjuvant pembrolizumab as NEOadjuvant pembrolizumab did.
Even more simply? If you just give patients a few doses of the pembrolizumab BEFORE you cut their cancer out, you do what $MRNA does for you, except with just the free tumor that’s already inside your body. No need to pay for this $400K drug.
And this makes rational sense, right? The whole point of $MRNA’s vaccine is to produce stuff that looks like the tumor.
You know what looks A LOT like the tumor does? THE FREAKING TUMOR!!!!!!
Absolutely poetic that $MRNA produced the EXACT HR benefit as neoadjuvant pembro did. Truly, the most hilarious possible outcome.
Now can we move on from this bullshit? $MRK and $MRNA should feel free to study their vaccine against the REAL standard of care now - NEOadjuvant immunotherapy.
From my perspective, this has been total fugaze, and an amateurish pump and dump worthy of much lesser enterprises.
6
4
1,576
LabRadar ✡️ retweeted
$MRNA with the single most hilarious possible outcome in this study. EFS HR 0.58. Down the the hundredth, EXACTLY what *NEO*-adjuvant treatment with pembro yielded against adjuvant pembro (the nerfed comparator $MRNA studied against) in SWOG S1801.
What does this mean in English? $MRNA’s drug is showing the exact same benefit versus adjuvant pembrolizumab as NEOadjuvant pembrolizumab did.
Even more simply? If you just give patients a few doses of the pembrolizumab BEFORE you cut their cancer out, you do what $MRNA does for you, except with just the free tumor that’s already inside your body. No need to pay for this $400K drug.
And this makes rational sense, right? The whole point of $MRNA’s vaccine is to produce stuff that looks like the tumor.
You know what looks A LOT like the tumor does? THE FREAKING TUMOR!!!!!!
Absolutely poetic that $MRNA produced the EXACT HR benefit as neoadjuvant pembro did. Truly, the most hilarious possible outcome.
Now can we move on from this bullshit? $MRK and $MRNA should feel free to study their vaccine against the REAL standard of care now - NEOadjuvant immunotherapy.
From my perspective, this has been total fugaze, and an amateurish pump and dump worthy of much lesser enterprises.