Confluent.
From: International Adhesions Society (tracy.joslin@adhesions.org)
Sun Nov 20 06:28:27 2005
From: adhesions@adhesions.org [mailto:adhesions@adhesions.org]
On Behalf Of DBargad@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 3:03 AM
Subject: Re: Confluent.
Dear Melody- Thank you for sharing your experiences
and being so proactive!!! It gives the rest of us
inspiration and strength. The thing with spray gel is,
and this is on a bio chemical level, a preparation that
could change the face of surgery as we know it.
I dont know if the FDA is stalling because there is
too much repeat business in adhesion surgery. Its
been several years. Adhesions seem to be a nuisance
to surgeons more than anything. That is upsetting in
itself. More people would have surgery if they
could recover adhesion free with spray gel. Atleast
I think so. I do know that several barriers and sprays
have failed in europe. I suspect that is why there is
so much reluctance in the USA. They are waiting for a
very high success rate outside the U.S. The strangest
thing is, that most of these coatings come from there
former use in industrial factory environments.
Finding a synthetic substance that the body wont reject,
and something that can prevent more adhesions from
forming is daunting to say the least. I also think that
the fact that Confluent is a small bio chemical company
versus Lily or Johnson & Johnson means there is no benefit
to big pharma. Confluent is a private company, and not a
worldwide leader in medications or biomedical fields.
Believe me when I tell you, If Eli Lily had the patent,
it would have passed by now. Its all red tape and who
is or isnt getting paid off. Bound up with adhesions and
red tape. I dont know which is more painful or
frustrating. Wishing you a pain free day. Deborah
|
