Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Forum rules
- Comments must be civil and on topic
- Back up claims with evidence/reasoning/sources (posting links is allowed)
- No commercials/harassment/spam
Post Reply
huntingonthebluffs
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:00 am

Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by huntingonthebluffs » Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:03 pm

Part 1:
Just what is confirmation bias (CB)? Many definitions exist for CB but most reflect the following: A CB is when a person selectively seeks out information that supports a belief or idea that they already have, thus 'confirming' their existing beliefs. CB is the propensity to collect proof that verifies preexisting anticipations, generally by stressing or going after proof that upholds such and at the same time, throwing out or declining to look for proof that contrasts such. The danger, of course, is that you leave this belief unchecked and start to act as though it were true. CB occurs from the direct influence of desire on beliefs. When people would like a certain idea/concept to be true, they end up believing it to be true. They are motivated by wishful thinking. CBs can sustain theories or research programs in the face of inadequate or even contradictory evidence. A CB is a type of cognitive bias that involves favoring information which confirms previously existing beliefs or biases. CB refers to processing information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with one’s existing beliefs. This biased approach to decision making is largely unintentional and often results in ignoring inconsistent information
.
So whatever side of the fence one might be on with regards to Geron / Imetelstat, there is likely a significant degree of CB involved. After all of us are human and I know I am guilty of CB. Many of us have incurred losses, large losses in our Geron investments, to say nothing of the impacts to patients mentality, well being, lives and family. All in all, CB is our reality, whether it is a blessing or a curse, it comes down to what we have learned from the past and how we manage it from here.

However, with that being said, it seems there are very legitimate Geron / Imetelstat positives that have been listed ad infinitum. These are not opinions, they are results and events that have occurred or goals that have been stated, are in plan and financed. The documented strategy appears consistent with on stellar results presented at ASH and analyst CCs. There are no legitimate negatives against these positives. Do we think we are there yet, either as a patient or investor? Again, I think not! Do we think there are legitimate concerns that could come to fruition? Yes. Do we think the positives far outweigh the negatives? Yes! So at this point is this CB?

Please speak for yourself, but in my opinion, Dr. John Scarlett has had a quiet, subtle intensity about him and his stated strategy on where he wants to take Geron and Imetelstat. In the process, JS and company are covering many of the bases and moving forward no matter what happens outside of their control. Is he covering all the important / critical bases, we don’t know for sure only what has been stated. And there are critical bases we probably don’t know anything about, such as results of conversations with the largest shareholders and regulators. However, we can’t have it both ways, either JS and company are taking care of business in a responsible manner or not. I personally believe many facts are available to indicate that business is being handled efficiently and effectively (i.e. look at your lists). While I don’t have any verifiable facts that it isn’t, only opinions on how it wasn’t enough or whatever. Am I totally satisfied, no. So at this point is this CB?

If the SEC decides to investigate then we may learn additional facts. If one or more of the largest shareholders weighs in with a list of demands (i.e. Nevro Corp./ NVRO) then we will likely see strategic shifts in the executive ranks and corporate plans. Am I taking any steps assuming these events will happen? No. So at this point is this CB?

So I ask the naysayers to define exactly what JS and company should do in detail. Exactly what should be done in detail, not just bluster and innuendo stuff. Now the details one provides should also, outline the pro’s and con’s for those actions, the costs, the benefits, the risks of the alternatives being recommended vs status quo and the difference in results that “will” occur based on their version of propellant and rudder being applied. So for example, what should be done to guarantee the trials are transferred and completed years sooner? What should be done to launch combination CT’s and when will those be completed along with costs and risks to the CTs in progress. What should the BODs look like and who and how are those members attracted, including costs and risks and what exactly makes each member better than the status quo? What should the corporate executive and BODs compensation plans look like and what are the cost and risks. And when that is all done, what will be the impact to the patients and shareholders? I can be persuaded but not by smoke and mirrors, so let’s have it.

Since I don’t just want an exit point for my Geron stock investment, I want a commercial product available for patients with MF. And of course for MDS and the other hemo cancers, and other types as well. My exit point can be handled in my will if necessary but the patients with these diseases come first. So if the naysayers are just looking at the pps, they are just noise to me and it is not a matter of CB. Anyone in charge can say or do something that “appears” to be on the surface a strategic move reflecting that the stock should be higher but that still has to be materialized, and until it is I need to see the facts and results and real steps of progress towards commericialization.

huntingonthebluffs
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:00 am

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by huntingonthebluffs » Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:04 pm

Part 2:

There is the fact that what happened between the JNJ/Janssen and Geron breakup has not been adequately explained and JS has been unwilling to take investors questions or talk about it. There seemed to be actions being taken that misled many of us. While this behavior begets trust issues, I do think the science and business path we are on is reasonably solid and based on facts and strong CT results. The current timelines are not satisfactory, but I think they will improve. However, since I am human, I know I have some CB. Unfortunately, maybe knowing Imetelstat’s potential, while having to watch a close relative suffer greatly, waste away and die of MF might have some bearing on that as well for many of our investment decisions here.

Now in my view, the negatives are mostly focused on management, their pay and lack of aggressiveness and much second guessing on how things should have been handled over the last year, 7 or even 25 years. Negatives also include concerns like competition is going to outthink and out maneuver Geron, competitive drugs will outperform and reach the market before Imetelstat, Geron will run out of money and dilute us into bankruptcy. And then there is the latest about the new hires whose ulterior motives for joining the Geron team are mostly about their ulterior motives such as pay and career titles versus what they professionally bring to the table or think about the Imetelstat science. Oh yes, and there is stuff like JS & his BODs are crooks and stealing shareholders blind and treating investors like mushrooms. So is “most” of this based on facts or just perceived or concocted based past business experiences, investment losses or hoped for profits by selling short? So is this negative CB?

Of course, we all know that there are some traders who play both sides by buying before pumping it up and selling it short before bashing it down, just to skim profits in both directions. Hopefully we are smart enough as investors to recognize these schemes as this is where most of the CB, both positive and negative is spewed and being sold from.

Those of us who are legitimately interested / excited about the potential for Geron’s Imetelstat to succeed as a widely used commercialized drug by itself as well as combinations will want to do a better job of continually processing the results coming from the company, competition and regulators. So my “refined view” on all of this is that one would be prudent to stay grounded in facts and actual results and use some logic and reasonable caution versus positive or negative feelings based heavily on opinions coming out of these boards. If we do that, it doesn’t matter what it is called as it will likely result in a reasonable level of success. So based on what I know are facts and actual results today, I am here for the long term and my expectations remain high for both patients and investors. Yes, I will also try to do a better job of keeping my eye on what I don’t know, what is conflicting and hopefully do a better job of navigating my investment and expectations.

biopearl123
Posts: 1665
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:13 pm

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by biopearl123 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:44 pm

Hunt, a marvelous Geron manifesto, thank you for posting and sharing your thoughts. Actually there has not been too much negativity on this board (unlike SA for example) and we were all in shock and traumatized by the Janssen decision. CB and your analysis of it is pertinent. Speaking for myself only, I look predominantly to presentations by Scarlett, his anointed physicians and the clinical trials site as well as FDA declarations regarding criterion for approval, scientific papers, patent filings, etc, as leading us closer to the truth. There is certainly a major trust issue given the misleading events that lead up to the failure to invoke the CD. I hope Scarlett will address this forthrightly in the shareholders meeting. We deserve that. I suspect he will have a lot of other things to talk about by then and the Janssen debacle will fade in its importance and we may not care that much by then if the value of the stock improves substaintially. If I were Scarlett, I would make sure that was the case and he is pretty smart. bp

bucbeard
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:30 am

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by bucbeard » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:29 am

Great perspectives from two of the Geron community's best. Thank you HOTB and BP!

huntingonthebluffs
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:00 am

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by huntingonthebluffs » Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:32 pm

Thanks Gentlemen, it’s nice to be able to build on what I think is rationale thinking with fair feedback and without the constant kickback. And to your point biopearl, the negative “opinion” is rarely presented on this board, which helps me maintain a level of sanity and gratitude for the platform you provide here. Also appreciation for your medical and scientific skills to boil it down as we all look to your opinion on what is most important and progressing or not in this space.

cheng_ho
Posts: 202
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by cheng_ho » Thu Mar 21, 2019 8:03 pm

It's obvious what JS should have done from the beginning... keep the GERN lab, and not go inactive for four years while Janssen tried out imet on the sickest patients they could find.

Did you ever get around to reading the Shay lab 2015 papers on telomerase inhibitors? Or at least watch the 2016 video? While JS went on vacation, science marched on. If GERN had kept some research going, then GERN stockholders could have known which combinations might work, where we'd be going for imet 2.0, etc.

Instead we've been pitched back to where we were in 2015 or so, but without even a team to start up work again. It would be laughable if it weren't killing so many patients... including us, because when GERN dumped telomerase activation for pennies to a company that can't even fund their TRAP lab, they killed us all.

At least, please, watch the video. Get up to the science of 2015...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8cL3v9Z_fs

karagozoglu12345
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:48 am

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by karagozoglu12345 » Sat Mar 23, 2019 8:01 pm

Cheng_ho: I couldn't agree with you more. Whenevr I raise the point that Tefferi/Mayo study and its patient population should have been replicated, folks seem to brush it off. Some say focus on the sickest of the patients was justified because there is no competition in that group. I believe there is no competition in the earlier stage patients as well given Jakafi's symptoms only effect. I am not sure if Tefferi/Mayo study can be characterized as Phase 1? Has there been any precedent in the history of biotech that a winning Phase 1 trial was modified to include a different patient population in Phase 2? Why take such a risk when you are a one trick pony company? Some argue JS didn't have a choice in the matter. Did he not lead Geron to forge the contract with J&J? How could a CEO work out the financial issues but neglect the product related issues in determining terms of the contract? Assuming the trial related terms in the contract were worked out by two parties, it was a mistake to agree on selecting the sickest of the patients. If his hands were tight in this regard for whatever reason, then as you suggest he should have kept GERON lab open to test the Jakafi- Imet cambo in newly diagnosed patients and intermidiate stage patients. To those who argue it was the right thing to do to select the sickest patients in the MF trial should remember that Dr. Tefferi claimed Imethad showed different machanism of action than Jakafi in that the former was effective in disease regression and the latter to treat the symptoms. I don't mean to reflect thoughts indifferent/insensitive to the sickest patient group. I believe if Geron/janssen focused on extending the Tefferi/Mayo study to Phase 2, and once the trial results confirm the disease regression effect, doctors would have used Imet in the very sick patients as off label, until extension studies in this patient group are finalized.

I agree with you that Geron management went on a "vacation" after the J&J contract. I am not sure the joint streeing committee was highly vigilant. If they were vigilant, how could it be possible that someone from Geron side of the committee not notice Janssen's misleading signals and not contact the right people to make an effort to stop these on a timely manner? Perhaps, one explanation is they did just that but Janssen continued their ploy. If such a scenario had played out, Janssen's and Geron's "administrative error" claims were baseless.

Some investors think at the start of Phase 3 for MDS share price will significantly appreciate to 5-6$. I wish that would the case but I am not sure it is believable. Investor community knows Phase 3 is imminent. So, why are we trading below $2 now. In biotech, share prices are anticipatory. So, why is the investment community not hopeful enough to anticipate great things with the Phase 3 in the horizon? a) No funds to complete the phase 3, b) New partner or dilution alternatives but each has problems of its own. Since it is hard to raise capital at current share prices, reverse stock split may be in the offing and this will hurt us current investors greatly. New partner is a better solution for us but would a suitor be interested with only MDS indication and even if they do, when 500 milyon $ revenues are shared our chances of receovering our losses diminish as well. Phase 3 in MF and combos increase chances of attracting a partner but, unfortunately, management does not appear proactive or AGGRESSIVE ENOUGH with these opportunities.
As always I am very open to counter arguments as well as correction of my facts and assumptions. Thank you for reading.

cheng_ho
Posts: 202
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by cheng_ho » Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:58 pm

I would guess that IF Geron actually announced a Phase 3 trial fully enrolled and dosing, the stock would go up at least briefly. There is a big difference between Phase 2 and Phase 3 drug approval probability. Recruiting isn't going to be trivial... patients have to swear off other MDS treatments and take the 1/3rd risk of being banished to the placebo group.

Dr. Raza isn't about monotherapy of any kind (notice her comments on that old CC about how she shouldn't "say too much", and read her essay in the book This Is A Brilliant Idea... Rizo's involvement in the venetoclax combo seem to indicate that she isn't either. ARGX got its recent success by doing a combination trial... if GERN could get a combo arm going in addition to the monotherapy, that would probably boost the chances of success dramatically. Whether Scarlett will put in the effort is doubtful, and the recent hold on venetoclax in MM isn't making things easier (ironically, combo at a lower dose might well be the solution to venetoclax side effects).

Overall, for the individual, cancer prevention is far more important than treatment. I look forward to seeing more papers on NAD+ boosting and mitochondrial health in the next couple of years, along with senolytics. My guess is that we can delay age-related high cancer rates for decades with the right prevention protocol.

karagozoglu12345
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:48 am

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by karagozoglu12345 » Thu Mar 28, 2019 10:52 pm

I agree about the pivotal importance of combo therapies for Geron’s success. Sadly, Geron management does not appear to be keen on such opportunity. I reread the transcript of the last CC to see if I missed anything of import. I was hard pressed to find any emphasis of a vision, well articulated mission envisioning and discerning the role of Imetelstat in cancer treatment in the long run, setting challenging but achievable goals, innovative business plan, big picture synthesis, ambition, and for that matter I was hard pressed to find anything beyond plans for the start of MDS Phase III. Opportunities beyond the MDS Phase III had to be brought about by the analysts and the answers were mainly “remains to be seen” re: MF and “ not priority now” re: combos.
Here is a good read about the managerial characteristics suitable for biotech sector (lacking in Geron IMO):
https://www.nature.com/bioent/2003/0301 ... -BE64.html
By the way, as pointed out in the above article and in the literature on leadership, integrity is a key trait found in good leaders. No one knows much about the culprit for Janssen’s misleading signals. However, I wish John Scarlett was sufficiently sensitive to the importance of this unfortunate event and offered his side of the story to the investors who suffered actual or on paper losses as a direct result of being mislead.

If my assessment is not fair, I stand to be corrected.

Also, I would appreciate your input regarding the outlook of the share price. At this time, I am hoping share price will rise to 3 $ at the start of MDS Phase III. I am willing to sell at 3$ level and take 250K loss. I certainly hope good things and surprises occur between now and end of summer to change my mind.

Zhears
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2018 12:19 pm

Re: Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?

Post by Zhears » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:27 am

I think that the current lack of vision, partners and combos is holding the share price down and will continue to do so.

MDS is funded, MF isn't. I don't think any one expects scarlet to take geron forward with just the MDS trail. That makes further dilution inevitable.
I think that the share price will rise over the coming months, good news is published (MDS Phase 3) and then swiftly followed by fund raising for MF. It would be the most sensible, go it alone option and scarlet has shown he is willing to do that.

The fear of that could be keeping a large number of investors away and the shorts hovering.
The lack of information and the way the debacle with JnJ was handled shows more of a value on the science that the share price (perfectly understandable).

I sincerely hope that some news is released which invalidates the above, because if it does then all bets are off and who knows where the share price will end up.

Post Reply