PTLA will be interesting. Put up or shut up. I think they might have some problems, but who knows.
MNTA looks a little expensive to me. The biosimilars business has been tough and their portfolio isn’t very differentiated. The rest of the pipeline looks interesting but maybe not at this price.
PBYI kind of looks attractive. Sequential growth continues and I can see this drug continue to climb in revenue.
I’m looking at WVE, SRPT, ABEO, TARO, DNLI, BCRX and many, many others.
Treatment-Free Remission After Combination Therapy with Ruxolitinib Plus Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.
This is a CML study with Jakafi.
Drug-drug Interaction Study between EDP-305, Fluconazole and Quinidine in Healthy Volunteers. Enanta.
A DDI study for ENTA’s FXR agonist. Not sure what these are worth.
Meta-Analysis of Vegetarian Diets and Incident Cardiovascular Outcomes. U Toronto.
Effect of Tableware Visual Cues on Portion Control and Eating Rate.
I’d like a plate that says, “stop eating, asshole”.
Comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of MYL-1701P and Eylea in Subjects with Diabetic Macular Edema. Mylan/Momenta.
This is bad for REGN but I suppose there are more than 1 biosimilar. I just don’t know who else.
Book Review – Unhinged: An Insider’s Account of the Trump White House
Few realize that the book publishing industry is a cornerstone of the “liberal media”. Most of us focus on news and television, but Simon & Schuster is a major culprit in the poisonously partisan media. One of their ways to attempt to influence society is to put out books like “Unhinged” by Omarosa Newman. They insist that “Unhinged” is a “tell-all and takedown from a strong, intelligent woman” and is a “must-read for concerned citizens”. Is “O” a strong, intelligent woman? This is a desperate claim from a publisher who would never publish the counter-narrative. We’re also promised “shocking details” of “alarming stories”. As I describe later, I was let down.
I can understand why a few nerdy book producers think funding projects like these will shape society, but they’re wrong. Books don’t sell well. A million copy book is very rare (I guess this book will sell 500,000 copies), and the number of folks who read them at all (half?), let alone read them seeking refutation of their pre-existing opinion is very small. Nevertheless, the systematic inclination to politically-driven greenlighting of book projects will result in the same partisan divide we see in television. Heaven help us if the general public begins to distrust what is printed in books as much as it distrusts the rest of the media.
In “Unhinged”, Newman outlines a life of aimless irony. As a proto-Trump she’s blissfully unaware that her demeanor and world-view is as cunning and “win-at-all-costs” as anyone else she’s attempting to shame. Her putative moral high ground relies solely on her perspective on race and gender issues, but otherwise, she’s obtuse (as we’re taught Republicans are), to the rest of the social justice topology. And as I’ll point out, she’s falls well sport of being a champion for minorities and women.
How did Omarosa become Omarosa? I’m not even sure she could tell you who she is today. Her memoir does little to shed light on her worldview or core beliefs. For a memoir, Newman comes off as the least endearing beneficiary of self-congratulation. There are bothersome details: she mentions in the Apprentice interview that she was a “PhD candidate” but never reveals at what school or what discipline. At some point she’s doing beauty pageants, but then gets into politics and then somehow finds herself in reality television. Naturally, her next stay is at the National Enquirer, followed by becoming a minister. The life path of our protagonist has no governing narrative or direction. Why? Omarosa, like many sociopaths, has no guiding light. She wants power, she wants fame, she wants money. Whatever hits her in the face in the morning, she’ll consider the opportunity and check if it maximizes one of those things. Perhaps a seventh failed career (model, academic, television personality, politician, journalist and clergy have not worked well thus far) is forthcoming.
The entire work is blemished by insincerity. It stunningly begins with her termination of employment, which savagely undermines her but sets a tone of blamelessness that permeates throughout. The naivete is raw: despite everything Newman claims to have seen and supposedly had misgivings about, she never quit. She explicates no fewer than three “last straws” that would cause her to quit the administration, several of which happen, and none of which lead to her leaving. This opportunist behavior neuters any attempt at an alternative explanation. The real story is, Newman tried to lie and manipulate in a world of liars and manipulators (politics) and she lost. Now she’s mad and has to salvage something. So, here we have a salacious half-true book that a left-wing publisher will stamp out. It’s cutting off your nose to spite your face, but if you need “that last five million”, this is certainly a way to do it. Through the retroscope, Newman claims she stayed with Trump “because of loyalty”. The French calls this espirit d’escalier. With all of the past in your hands, it is easy to sculpt the best story. In what is supposed to be an honest catharsis, Newman believes us to be fools. A loyal person is loyal, all of the time. When they’re slighted or betrayed, they don’t write a book as revenge. They walk away, perhaps even in disgust or hatred, but writing a “tell-all” is the antithesis of loyalty. Loyalty is easy on the way up, it is defined on the way down. It means “I’ll stick with you through thick and thin” and “I’ll never be vicious to you if something bad happens” and “I won’t be fickle and abandon and forsake you”. Any claim to a past loyalty is preposterous. Trump served a purpose for Newman and that purpose is exhausted. She is an opportunist, the opposite of a loyalist. She doesn’t even have a particularly good reason to be mad with the President, who commended her and wished her well! Writing this book is just another opportunity for a conniving actor.
We see Newman’s faulty logic on display. First, she loves Hillary Clinton. She’s an inspiring woman. Then, she’s deeply disappointed that she doesn’t cut ties with her husband after an affair. She’s even aghast at her behavior in defending him. So far, so consistent. Then, Newman inexplicably joins the Clinton-Gore White House. After that, she joins Clinton’s 2016 campaign via PAC, only to be slighted. In seeking revenge, she goes to work for Trump’s campaign. Newman isn’t loyal or even logical–she’s petty and whorish. One truly insightful moment, unoriginal I assume, is that Clinton lost because of a pervading feeling instilled by the media that her victory was assured. I haven’t thought thoroughly about the election but this makes sense and it is truly enjoyable that the media, which tried so hard to bolster Clinton, may have cost her a victory.
We get Newman’s naive but pathetic and meretricious excitement over having a big office, a 60 inch TV screen and other tiny perks that are evidently exhilarating to her. It is fitting she was fired for allegedly abusing the car service provided by the government. She complains that other cabinet members have made similar abuses in orders of magnitude. The faulty logic and aloof naivete continue. Newman explains her termination was traumatic because the door was locked. I haven’t been in too many meetings where I was planning on running out of the room in the first place. (I have been in one or two, however.) I’ve also never had a serious position at the White House, where I would imagine something like that should not terrify you. It’s just disingenuous. She’s shocked at being asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, describing it as someone who has never seen one before might. I just can’t reconcile whether Omarosa is very stupid or thinks we’re very stupid. Perhaps both. But I know she’s disgusting. After the National Enquirer writes an awful story about her regarding her brother’s death, and she sues, she settles for working FOR them. No loyalty to an employer, sure. No loyalty to your dead brother…?
Newman claims she was fired for getting close to the elusive “N-word tape”, the reason anyone cares about her or this book. There is no actual, official account of why she was fired and the official side of the story is probably the most interesting. Her narrative makes her seem whiny and pettish. Once you’re no longer wanted in an organization, you have to ask yourself what you did to create that dynamic. Newman doesn’t even consider that attempting to obtain a career-ending recording of her boss could be grounds for termination. Still, no tape has been produced and it’s clear to Newman that President Trump is not overtly racist for much of her relationship with him. She insists his organizations are diverse and he has a large number of black friends. Only in hindsight does she believe she was some sort of Stockholm Syndrome victim. She contradicts herself within a few pages, sometimes noting that some behavior “did not match the man I knew” but then claiming the warning signs were there. The dizzy circular references betray already cratered expectations of honesty.
Only after her political career is over, only after she is summarily excused from her employment and only after some agent or publisher dangles a check in front of her, does Newman actually take action. People don’t buy books like this and have their minds changed. People who read books like this are idiots, diabetics looking for that sweet candy bar to indulge in. Omarosa isn’t credible or intelligent enough to hold sway over anyone. It takes a real devious person to “kiss and tell” so quickly and it’s clear Omarosa’s strong suit is not loyalty, as she professes. She was simply waiting to monetize her position, and in virtually any book deal, she is willing to sell herself cheap. Books don’t make people rich or powerful. I almost feel sorry for this ambitious person derailed by her own appetite for power. The rest of her life will be reliving glory days, praying for some opening to stage a “comeback” when her funds run out.
O is no writer. You don’t read a book like this for its prose, but she does humorously brag about her writing skills. For such a talented writer, the book is not endearing at all. Despite significant tragedy in her life, you don’t feel bad for O. She’s begging you to bestow her with accolades for overcoming her personal tragedies and as a woman of color achieving what she has. The only problem is it is 2018 and women of color make incredible achievements and she has not achieved anything other than being born beautiful. She’s not Oprah, Beyonce or the Williams sisters. There is no actual talent with Newman, other than her ability to set ethics aside and care solely for herself. Everyone deals with personal tragedies and becoming a reality TV show afterthought, followed by working at the National Enquirer doesn’t put you in some eternal pantheon with Disraeli, Kant and Churchill. She’s a nobody who somehow (could have something to do with her beauty pageant qualities) got a freak chance to be around some powerful people and now she’s a nobody again. I’d feel bad if my greatest value is being able to be chatty about a short period of my life. Any “tell-all” author has to have some psychological issues with their own fading relevance. Why not shut up, take the high road and move on? The answer is Omarosa Newman doesn’t know what the high road looks like, where it is or how to get there. But she is happy to point out your mistakes.