Minerva vs NovaSure

Quote
anonymous said:
A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION HAS BEEN CIRCULATING AND IT ABSOLUTLY IS CHANGED. Who do you think you are fooling? Why are you continuing to blatantly lie? It’s such an easy thing to disprove.

This is truly an unbelievable display of disgraceful business ethics.
Click to expand...

Is English not your first language? Did you actually read the post you responded to?
 






anonymous said:
It seems like the over agressive bully on here is actually some sort of management type at Hologic, trying to justify the disgusting acts of the company by further lying about the facts. It’s almost as if the sales force is pushing back on this bogus data, and this messaging is for them. FOLKS THEY ARE LYING TO YOU. My god, what a toxic culture.

Explain again why JMIG and American Journal of Gynecology rejected the study? because they claim potential patient bias and numerous ethics violations. The explanation I’ve heard before is some sort of conspiracy theory against Hologic? Meanwhile, every piece of legitimate data produced by reputable journals or the FDA shows statistical significance in terms of the benefits of Minerva over Novasure (or any of the other ablation devices created before the year 2000). This Dove Press garbage dumpster fire retrospective survey (which all doctors know is an absolute joke of a method for conducting a study) is the only “publication” which shows the opposite to be true. Compound that with new reps without relationships, or without any idea what they are actually talking about for that matter, running around blindly with this thing. I predict significant damage to the brand.

There will be significant fall out for the way Hologic management is conducting themselves in this market. The FDA is on to them and it is only a matter of time before the hammer falls. And that will be a good day.
Click to expand...

Well articulated
 












It’s really simple, if the results of the Novasure were better than what the products labeling says (78% success 36% amenorrhea), why not submit an updated study showing such to the FDA for enhanced labeling? Seems like a much more honest way of going about this discussion. Instead of circulating marketing sponsered retrospective surveys which create so many questions and concerns?

Mr, McIntosh could you please explain that one?
 






anonymous said:
It’s really simple, if the results of the Novasure were better than what the products labeling says (78% success 36% amenorrhea), why not submit an updated study showing such to the FDA for enhanced labeling? Seems like a much more honest way of going about this discussion. Instead of circulating marketing sponsered retrospective surveys which create so many questions and concerns?

Mr, McIntosh could you please explain that one?
Click to expand...

Following
 






Some very interesting and seemingly valid points here that are swaying me to believe the study was doctored by Hologic. The person who pointed out that the reps in HOLX are new to the industry and having little/no clinical experience to understand also holds a lot of water. They're just listening to marketing and sales leadership. This could prove to be very ugly for HOLX if this gets enough attention.
 






anonymous said:
Some very interesting and seemingly valid points here that are swaying me to believe the study was doctored by Hologic. The person who pointed out that the reps in HOLX are new to the industry and having little/no clinical experience to understand also holds a lot of water. They're just listening to marketing and sales leadership. This could prove to be very ugly for HOLX if this gets enough attention.
Click to expand...
 






anonymous said:
Some very interesting and seemingly valid points here that are swaying me to believe the study was doctored by Hologic. The person who pointed out that the reps in HOLX are new to the industry and having little/no clinical experience to understand also holds a lot of water. They're just listening to marketing and sales leadership. This could prove to be very ugly for HOLX if this gets enough attention.
Click to expand...


I disagree.

HOLX is the largest women's health company in the world. What they sell touches damn near every aspect of an OB/GYN's practice. Novasure has over 80 peer reviewed studies.

Minerva is a startup who is completely out of cash and taking on debt now.


It looks to me like Minerva is throwing their Hail Mary and hoping that if they make enough noise, they can discredit one of their own lead physicians as well as the company that is one of the most trusted names in Women's health. They should have sold when they had the chance, rather than being greedy and watching as the wheels come off.
 






anonymous said:
I disagree.

HOLX is the largest women's health company in the world. What they sell touches damn near every aspect of an OB/GYN's practice. Novasure has over 80 peer reviewed studies.

Minerva is a startup who is completely out of cash and taking on debt now.


It looks to me like Minerva is throwing their Hail Mary and hoping that if they make enough noise, they can discredit one of their own lead physicians as well as the company that is one of the most trusted names in Women's health. They should have sold when they had the chance, rather than being greedy and watching as the wheels come off.
Click to expand...

Don't make the mistake thinking the past is indicative of the future or that things like size and market share will always protect you. Nor should you make the mistake that a startup can't come in and flip business (no one cares if a start-up company is taking on debt BTW). You seem to be forgetting Hologic purchased Cytyc-- every company starts as a small company. Minerva might be a nice tuck-in acquisition for a company like Medtronic, J&J, Stryker, etc.

If the study is in fact "dirty" it would be a major blow to Hologic's credibility. And you can bet your *$# that GYN leadership will be fired since Steve put his name on the line about the legitimacy of the study.
 






anonymous said:
I disagree.

HOLX is the largest women's health company in the world. What they sell touches damn near every aspect of an OB/GYN's practice. Novasure has over 80 peer reviewed studies.

Minerva is a startup who is completely out of cash and taking on debt now.


It looks to me like Minerva is throwing their Hail Mary and hoping that if they make enough noise, they can discredit one of their own lead physicians as well as the company that is one of the most trusted names in Women's health. They should have sold when they had the chance, rather than being greedy and watching as the wheels come off.
Click to expand...

Fool. Minerva is not out of money and is finally gaining real momentum. Access into the hospital markets takes time, and the doctors are smart enough to now see first hand the benefits to the updated technology. The Hologic tactics of trying to block Minerva from market are failing wholesale. Now the desperation at Hologic is apparent, why else produce a horse shit retrospective survey (LOL, I mean seriously) and try to peddle it as real data. Hire an army of clueless B2B sales reps to unknowingly spread false and unethical data, just keep feeding them the KoolAid, heavy on the lies, and hope the misinformation and fake news will plug the bleeding. And believe you me there is bleeding sales, back to back quarters now with 15%+ market share loss to Minerva. Hologic is not worried about losing this battle to Minerva. What they are afraid of, is Medtronic or Boston Scientific coming in here and purchasing Minerva. That would be the end of days scenario for the Hologic Women’s Health Division.
 






anonymous said:
Some very interesting and seemingly valid points here that are swaying me to believe the study was doctored by Hologic. The person who pointed out that the reps in HOLX are new to the industry and having little/no clinical experience to understand also holds a lot of water. They're just listening to marketing and sales leadership. This could prove to be very ugly for HOLX if this gets enough attention.
Click to expand...
 






anonymous said:
Some very interesting and seemingly valid points here that are swaying me to believe the study was doctored by Hologic. The person who pointed out that the reps in HOLX are new to the industry and having little/no clinical experience to understand also holds a lot of water. They're just listening to marketing and sales leadership. This could prove to be very ugly for HOLX if this gets enough attention.
Click to expand...

Not sure I see your reasoning here.
 






ive posted numerous time in this back and forth and quite frankly, I’m ready to find out the truth. We will see,but this thread is now pointless, we will find out which company lied to their reps, doctors, and ultimately lose integrity. Our customers are sick of it, hopefully this brings a much needed conclusion.
 






Minerva doesn’t lie to anyone. Reps only go around with FDA cleared and validated data. They only speak about their product to their customers. They sell on the merits of a really cool, incredibly sophisticated technology. There are so many solved pain points from the Ablation devices created pre Y2K. The fact that there is even a question about the superiority seems silly. Especially since Minerva was created by the brilliant folks that brought Novasure to market in the first place!
 






Hit another dead end, did we? Poor lil' Kev. Shame. Everybody's hip to your deceitful tricks. Conniving and trickery and lying aren't always the most effective approaches. Kudos for the ongoing effort though. You really don't have any choice but dreaming up these last-ditch desperate efforts, do you? If it wasn't so painful you wouldn't need to work so hard trying to quash such an inconsequential report. Like a 3-legged toothless coyote backed into a corner. Papa Clap's last stand. A predictably painful demise.
 












It's mentioned online. Mostly in press releases that don't mean a lot to anybody but the naive. I'm trying to balance minerva description of ijwh as a nothing journal but they send out press releases asking for retraction...

The paper itself is not winning any prizes and retro design isn't highest quality evidence of course, but that doesn't mean its worthless. I read it. It's innocuous. So why such dispute? Appreciate competition but knocking eachother around using lies and misdirection?

I'm a surgeon in Ohio, an interested party but definitely not an investor in either company. Gotta tell you, the childishness of these exchanges, especially by the Minerva camp, is directing me back towards ablation alternatives. I don't believe either of your sides, but it's pretty clear by the repeated accusations without proof that Minerva speaks many untruths--I have not read any claims from the Hologic side apart from: here's the paper read and decide its value.

I just don't understand how a controversial paper, apparently controversial and hopefully thoroughlyt investigated before it went to print, passed muster if any of the current minerva accusations were even partially true?

Explain how this could occur? You can realistically expect that any modern medical journal would not risk their reputation (and income) by publishing a paper, especially after being forced to spend money and manpower on an investigation, unless they decided the accusations were silly and without substance. Doesn't add up.
 






We are interested reading this report even far region of India: https://www.medindia.net/health-pre...a-rates-than-those-treated-with--366517-1.htm . Thank you but we are advanced more than you understand.

Is not likely that journal would favour one method over other to publish paper. If really investigation then probably solved. Not to argue (like with mother in law ha ha). No, only joking. Serious--maybe problems were solved and ok when review? Why say bad things that are not scientific and don't say evidence?

Ravi
 












anonymous said:
Minerva doesn’t lie to anyone. Reps only go around with FDA cleared and validated data. They only speak about their product to their customers. They sell on the merits of a really cool, incredibly sophisticated technology. There are so many solved pain points from the Ablation devices created pre Y2K. The fact that there is even a question about the superiority seems silly. Especially since Minerva was created by the brilliant folks that brought Novasure to market in the first place!
Click to expand...

"by the brilliant folks that brought Novasure to market"

You tried to build a better mousetrap and it's not impressive. Brilliant! And never did you expand your minds to solve other problems--you just latched onto the tit of the woman then decided to go to bottle-feeding.

Pure genius.

Dude and Minerva women, you guys figured out a new way to steam-clean the uterus without (hopefully) wrecking other organs permanently. It's all heat and steam--both of you clowns. Your Star Trek "argon" bs "plasma" nonsense woos investors but not doctors. You make steam, asshole. Cook endometrium. There's no calculus involved. It's not really "novel" at all and the AE reports support that.

If you had such a firm grip with such a solid product with such top-notch results then you wouldn't be expending a serious sum to try to discredit a non-threatening (low-value) retro report, would you?

You're screwed.
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote