RE:RE:some more interesting commentary from Adcom:
Further to my last point, and as Telesta is allowed to trade down to cash value, what precedent has the FDA used for a ruling contrary to Adcomm. Have they ever seen a situation like this Gongshow where the majority of Active/practising Urologists (those who actually treat Bladder Cancer daily) supported approval, other Urologists indicated they could support approval and the remaining panelists votes were NOs but, except for 1 or 2 of the 18, really are unsure they were NOs and are even less clear what it was they were voting on?
The FDA is a precedent driven organization. What precedent will they defer to to justify disallowing MCNA market access in these circumstances.
Anybody ever heard of Karl Rove. Was he sitting behind the two way glass when this went down?