ADVFN Logo ADVFN

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for default Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.

FUM Futura Medical Plc

41.25
-0.05 (-0.12%)
Last Updated: 12:02:27
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Futura Medical Plc LSE:FUM London Ordinary Share GB0033278473 ORD 0.2P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.05 -0.12% 41.25 41.25 41.30 41.30 40.60 41.30 125,876 12:02:27
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
Pharmaceutical Preparations 3.1M -6.51M -0.0217 -18.71 122.09M
Futura Medical Plc is listed in the Pharmaceutical Preparations sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker FUM. The last closing price for Futura Medical was 41.30p. Over the last year, Futura Medical shares have traded in a share price range of 24.10p to 67.00p.

Futura Medical currently has 300,712,293 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Futura Medical is £122.09 million. Futura Medical has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of -18.71.

Futura Medical Share Discussion Threads

Showing 18451 to 18461 of 21550 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  742  741  740  739  738  737  736  735  734  733  732  731  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
19/4/2023
23:14
£25 for a pack of 4 in Boots... suspect sales will be p*ss poor One to watch closely, weak sales will be flagged by price cuts and promotions Be interesting to see if they can pump this higher
truant2tb1
19/4/2023
22:53
FTC And NAD Remind Industry Of Their Authority Over All Health Product Advertising



FTC shares jurisdiction with FDA over the marketing of dietary supplements, foods, drugs, medical devices, and other health-related products. Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding between the two agencies, FDA has primary responsibility over claims that appear on labeling, while FTC has primary responsibility for claims made in advertising. Both agencies require health-related marketing to be truthful and substantiated. Unlike FDA, however, FTC does not distinguish between categories of health-related products or claims in evaluating advertising claims. Rather, according to FTC, "the FTC's approach to the advertising of health-related products is the same regardless of whether, under FDA law, the product is considered a food, a supplement[,] or a drug." Moreover, FTC has emphasized that the Memorandum of Understanding does not "limit the FTC's jurisdiction or prohibit the agency from taking action against deceptive labeling claims or obtaining orders that address all forms of marketing, including claims that appear in labeling."

Ensure Clear and Conspicuous Disclosure Where disclosure of qualifying information is necessary, FTC requires such disclosure to be presented clearly and conspicuously, so "it is difficult to miss (i.e., noticeable) and easily understandable by ordinary consumers

Monitor the Quality of the Evidence. Additionally, FTC discusses that it will also examine the internal validity of each piece of evidence provided to support a health claim. FTC advises marketers to ensure the research on which they rely complies with the following basic principles:

The human clinical trial should have both a treatment group and a control group;
The study should be randomized;
The study should be double blinded;



FTC and NAD Remind Industry of Their Authority Over All Health Product Advertising



A new threat to advertisers making sketchy health claims







companies deceptively touted

‘clinically proven’

Class members with proof of purchase are eligible to recover up to $65. Those without proof may recover up to $20.

The companies also agreed to change all references from ‘clinically proven’ and ‘science proved’ on Neuriva labeling and ancillary marketing to ‘clinically tested’ ‘science tested’ or other similar language.

Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted preliminary approval April 23.

Plaintiffs attorneys will seek up to $2.9 million for fees and expenses. They will also seek incentive awards up to $2,000 each for five class representatives.




Clinically proven? Says who?

When they say clinically proven your first question should be, oh yeah, says who?

It is possible the company selling the supplement, infomercial ab gadget, or balance device did a poorly controlled ˜study’ where they had people try the product and then tell the company about their results.

While this seems logical enough, it does not constitute legitimate research.

lbo
19/4/2023
22:50
Why does anyone bother to respond to lbo instead of ignoring his posts?
storming norm
19/4/2023
22:03
Here's a couple more snippets from LSE back in Dec 2021. Remember, LiarBO says that he never posted there as LaimBooth or anyone else:



1. The use of the term 'placebo' stems from the fact that MED3000 started life as the placebo in FM57 when MED2005 was being trialled. It's continued use has been promulgated by the likes of Liarbooth who used it a negative term in his stock bashing tactics. That's my understanding, anyway, but there again, I tend to blame everything on that tawt!

2. OMG, the breath-taking irony of Liarbooth coming out with "Futura need to distance themselves from these rampers before they create more serious reputational damage to Futura."
You just couldn't make that up, could you? Liarbooth, whose sole reason for being here is to trash Futura by using lies, distortions, false trails, and just plain rubbish to try and put off new investors across multiple platforms, is concerned that Futura might suffer reputational damage because I've skewered Liarbooth on his massive lie ABOUT VIAGRA !
Well, I'm sure Futura will take all appropriate measures to heed Liarbooth's warning and sack me immediately! Hahahaha! You sad sack, Liarbooth!

3. booth have you completely lost it? where do i suggest that,or any other poster on here posts on ADVFN? i can only speak for myself of course,but i am not a member of ADVFN and do not post there.you on the other hand,do post there in the same vein as LBO (i note you did not deny it).i think this answers the question as to which of us is the obsessive or for hire poster

petroc
19/4/2023
20:53
Yes Eroxon could be an Alpecin! So could any similar gel made of alcohol, water, glycol and carbomer!!! LOL

Just like Pet500 and CSD500 could have been something but failed to sell long term even though they had more USPs and enforceable patents! Yet Reckitt still have similar products to those Futura failed products on the market! And they and GSk both walked away from MED!

If It does get De Novo medical device registration and there actually is a real market for drug free male arousal gels for psychogenic ED. It wont take long for Reckitt or competitors if they are inclined to launch a similar alcohol, water, glycol and Carbopol arousal gel product for men via the 510k pathway!

A De Novo premarket review pathway, a regulatory pathway for low- to moderate-risk devices of a new type. Along with this De Novo authorization, the FDA is establishing criteria called special controls that define the requirements related to labeling and performance testing. When met, the special controls, in combination with general controls, provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness for devices of this type. This action also creates a new regulatory classification, which means that subsequent devices of the same type with the same intended use may go through the FDA 510(k) pathway, whereby devices can obtain clearance by demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device

The average length of time for clearance under the traditional 510(k) pathway is 177 days,



A company must compare their product to one already cleared by the FDA and provide evidence that their product is substantially equivalent to the previously cleared (legally marketed) device. To be substantially equivalent, the product must meet criteria for the same intended use, have the same technology or (slightly) different technology but produces similar end results, and be safe and effective. Once pre-market clearance is received from the FDA the device can be distributed commercially



Here's a startling fact: between 80% and 90% of new product launches fail, according to multiple studies including Harvard Business Review. Each year, more than 30,000 new products hit the market, from companies large and small, and year after year, history is littered with dead carcasses



Research at the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute shows new product launches can be a risky undertaking for brand owners. Investigating 83,719 new product introductions over an eight-year period, the research finds around one in four new products failed to survive one year after launch. This failure rate increased to around 40% two years after launch.



Why Most Product Launches Fail

lbo
19/4/2023
20:44
https://www.dovepress.com/testing-topical-products-specifically-to-reduce-inflammatory-pain-from-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-JPRVoltarol Emugel vehicle is gel is made of the same 'evaporative cooling' ingredients as in Eroxoncarbomer,isopropyl alcohol,propylene glycol,waterhttps://indigo.bluematrix.com/indigo/Viewer.action?info=U7Z%2F%2BSxWYbPQB8QtqH%2Bh5KgushbvU5dK'TPR100 gave similar results to the gold standard, Voltarol 2% gel'https://www.gskhealthpartner.com/content/dam/cf-consumer-healthcare/health-professionals/en_IN/pdf/article-1.pdfThe cooling effect of a topically applied product can be evaluated using a validated handheld thermal imaging system. When the gel matrix is destroyed after application to the skin, the bound water and alcohol evaporates and a measurable cooling-effect results. Consumer satisfaction with a topical product is based on subjective criteria such as how the product feels and how it is perceived on the skin. Therefore, appropriate questionnaires are of major importance for cosmetic products to assess the subjective perception not only of soothing and cooling effects but also of moisturizing properties and fragrance.In TPR100 for pain Dermasys is delivering Diclofenac! Same as Voltaren. In Med2002/2005 for ED it was delivering GTN. In Med3000 its delivering nothing! And Med3000 is just a low class medical device and is far from 'highly differentiated' from arousal gels or lubricants!https://www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/?ACT=18&ID=10479intellectual property protection is limited to use patents for the individual products and umbrella patents for the technology. There is a risk that some claims will either be challenged in future (eg on the grounds of non-obviousness or existence of prior art) and/or that another technology may be employed to achieve a similar effect.The protracted development times mean the clock has been ticking on the original issued patents, reducing the protected commercial product
lbo
19/4/2023
20:40
Does Alpecin have an enforceable patent?

Because Med3000 doesn’t have any enforceable patent and its made from alcohol, water, glycol and carbomer! LOL

Even the market analysts know all Futura have done is paid for the research and paved the way to allow big companies like Reckitt also claim all its class 2 medical device lubricants/arousal gels are also placebo treatments for Psychogenic ED!



˜You are the active ingredient’




Reckitt Benckiser was the defined leader and the ultimate four Personal lubricant vendors with leading brands such as Durex Play and K-Y Jelly.

KEY GROWTH FACTORS

Increasing prevalence of erectile dysfunction

9 Market Growth Enablers
9.1 Increasing Prevalence of Erectile Dysfunction




A placebo is anything that seems to be a "real" medical treatment -- but isn't. It could be a pill, a shot, or some other type of "fake" treatment. What all placebos have in common is that they do not contain an active substance meant to affect health


So arousal gels too can replicate all the associated Med3000 placebo benefits the rampers list. Especially in psychogenic ED sufferers who already reported responding to manual massag. Just like the inclusion criteria in the FM57 deficient test design selected for!


Now competitors like Reckitt can also sell lubricants/arousal gels as ‘clinically proven’ placebo treatments for ED. And report Med3000 to the ASA, FTC etc for being misleading if it doesnt inform consumers that Med3000 itself has no proven effect in ED beyond a placebo gel. As it has not proven efficacy beyond a placebo gel in a adequately controlled study or even against any standard cooling lubricant/arousal gel



Placebo-nomics: how bad was what Nurofen did?

Australian courts have ordered the makers of the brand to stop repackaging identical painkillers for different pains where does marketing end and deception begin?

Lies come in a wide range of ethical shapes and sizes. There are white ones, diplomatic ones, and there are mean, self-serving ones. Apparently there are even nice, Christmassy ones.

The Australian federal court yesterday ordered the drug giant Reckitt Benckiser to stop selling identical products marketed as specific Nurofen varieties for back pain, period pain, migraine pain and tension headaches. The company admitted the drugs sold in different coloured packets all contained the same active ingredient: 342mg of ibuprofen lysine. It also sold them at almost twice the price of Nurofens standard ibuprofen products.
Whether this constitutes deception or just marketing is probably one for the lawyers to argue over. Whatever its called, such practices might appear to fall pretty unequivocally towards the self-serving whopper end of the scale

lbo
19/4/2023
19:13
Try new Eroxon stimgel

To welcome back your erections





From the website


Thought was great

j777j
19/4/2023
19:10
Well, it had to be said by somebody and so I thought it might as well be me but apologies if I wasn't the first. "Get your Eroxon - and your rocks off"
meltwood2
19/4/2023
18:11
LBO , what's your view on Alpecin? Makes the Wolf group fortunes, no clinical evidence whatsoever .
jonnyno1
19/4/2023
17:52
Well a five to ten percent marketshare out of a $5 billion a year marketplace.

A lot higher than 100p

j777j
Chat Pages: Latest  742  741  740  739  738  737  736  735  734  733  732  731  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock