Futura Medical Share Discussion Threads

[truant2tb1] 22/12/2022 23:49

FUM has a habit of "drifting" down to 40p... only issue is it then continues to drift down to 30p onwards!A very interesting 2023 awaits here, plenty of twists and turns to come

[truant2tb1] 22/12/2022 23:47

Quite right, will we see one tomorrow?

[petroc] 22/12/2022 23:36

I know LiarBO hangs around until about this time of night to post what he hopes will be the last posts of the night, so good night LiarBO, enjoy your 9 hours of fame!

PS Everything he says is a lie or a misrepresentation! Good night!

[petroc] 22/12/2022 23:30

Hahahaha! LiarBO said 'The ramper has also admitted he is pumping and will be dumping'! Almost right, LiarBO! I took some profit at 55p last week, (quite a lot, actually!) and I'm waiting for it to drift down to 40p-ish when I'll buy back in again. However, I think you'll admit I haven't been de-ramping in the meantime!

[petroc] 22/12/2022 23:22

Usually RNSs are greeted with a nice jump in share price Don't know why the fantasist would be interested.

[petroc] 22/12/2022 19:29

Over 60% of men who used MED3000 in two clinical trials and one real world trial said that it worked. LiarBO, who has never used it, says it doesn't work. Hmmn, who to believe?

[truant2tb1] 22/12/2022 18:59

Would love an Xmas eve RNSDeath spiral funding secured ?

[lbo] 22/12/2022 18:47

Med3000 was also just the placebo in the FM57 study. Therefore Futura had initially believed Med3000 had no therapeutic effect. The FM57 study did not set out to measure the efficacy of Med3000. The ASA will therefore consider that its reported effectiveness by Futura was a ˜post-hoc finding’.

The CAP Code required that objective claims, including medical claims for a CE-marked medical device, be backed by evidence

a certified Class IIb medical device. We understood that the device certification was granted by a body within the European Member States that had been designated to carry out conformity assessments under the Medical Device Directive

had been used as the placebo treatment in that study, and therefore the researcher had initially believed it had no therapeutic effect. The trial did not set out to measure the efficacy

its reported effectiveness by the advertiser was a post-hoc finding due to the risk of that being a false positive finding

We were also concerned that there was not an adequate placebo control in the trial. We, therefore, considered that the study did not provide adequate evidence for the claim ˜clinically proven’



One specialist commentator felt that the clinical effectiveness has not been demonstrated. The absence of an adequate placebo (an inactive topical gel) for highlighted as a limitation by 3 commentators. One commentator said that without it, the clinical effectiveness could be attributed to the placebo effect of rubbing a gel

[petroc] 22/12/2022 17:45

The company hasn't failed P3, MED2005 did, and that only failed because it was being compared to what is now MED3000. 2005 failed because 3000 performed so well. And that, prospective buyers, is why FUM decided to go with MED3000 as a device. Because it worked in over 60% of men with moderate to severe ED. NB: generic viagra is also being sold OTC with no prescription.

[petroc] 22/12/2022 16:07

The company hasn't failed P3, MED2005 did, and that only failed because it was being compared to what is now MED3000. 2005 failed because 3000 performed so well. And that, prospective buyers, is why FUM decided to go with MED3000 as a device. Because it worked in over 60% of men with moderate to severe ED. NB: generic viagra is also being sold OTC with no prescription.