Having no experience with previous management (but hear the...

Having no experience with previous management (but hear the stories) and being a relatively new shareholder (few months), I'm not so tainted. However I expect their are a few brokerage houses that were not happy. But a lot has changed and the new strategy seems to be working.

Anyway here's some quotes from doctors from the Wilson's HTM report...

Comments include
?? “.. so damn simple – allows for easy change in treatment of burns” (Burns specialist)

?? “… nobody likes change – patients will demand it” – in reference to how easy it will be to train and convert surgeons to use ReCell. (Burns specialist).

?? “… easily treat 50% of the burns patients I see in my practice p.a. with ReCell alone. Huge off label use potential. Also ReCell can be used on the donor site and this is especially important for the aged.” – in response to questioning about how many burns cases would be applicable to be treated with ReCell. (Burns specialist).

?? “… scalding in kids is typically not treated with grafts: I would use ReCell. It would change the way 15%-30% of burns that are not currently grafted are treated.” (Burns and scar surgeon).

?? “… lack of success in Europe by C3 probably due to lack of sales force education. I wish it was in my hands already. The technology has not been well explained. Cosmetic use is going to be big for US surgeons” – in response to question on perception of why sales have in the past been so poor. (burns and scar specialist).

?? “I have used it to treat vitiligo. The patients are happy with the result, but I’m not impressed with the results” (Burns and Plastic surgeon).

?? ReCell wounds look better, are softer and many grow hair back. Compared with grafts, there is instantly reduced morbidity of the donor site, and reduced donor site disease which can be fatal in elderly patients. The downside is that by itself it can only be used on partial thickness wounds. For full thickness burns it probably needs to be used in conjunction with meshed autograft.

?? The editor of Burns, Steven E Wolf, cited ReCell “…as a very interesting technique that could revolutionise grafting in the future. More data and experience will be required.” (Burns 34 (2008) 1019-1071)

?? Every patient I have used it on has shown better outcomes with ReCell (compared with grafts).

?? Good clinical data is lacking. If AFIRM trial results are good, and if FDA approves ReCell, it would help commercialise/convince surgeons.

?? I am practicing revolutionary burn treatment with ReCell. It is unheard of to discharge a patient with 30% total body surface area burn after only 3 weeks – but that’s what I’m doing.