Confirmation Bias, is there a way through it?
Posted: 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.
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.