Please Note: Blog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors.

SeekingAlpha Undermines NeoStem's (NBS) Stock Performance With Nom De Plume Fact And Questionable Articles

SeekingAlpha undermines NeoStem's (NBS) stock performance with nom de plume fact and questionable articles

Again and again, the vehicle for shorts to "obscure" the facts via S/A

The RegMed sector, I thought was emerging from "hibernation" but, as the markets take down one … so goes the universe.

"NeoStem (NBS closed -10.5%) started the day in positive territory but quickly faded into the red and is now down double-digits. Even they < SeekingAlpha (S/A)> admit … It looks likely that an article by SeekingAlpha contributor Probio Invest <3 articles, 2 instablog and 33 followers> is weighing on the shares. Probio says a study that showed autologous stem cells did not boost heart function "clearly does not bode well for NBS' AMR-001." <Source: SeekingAlpha>

Article that I question … https://seekingalpha.com/article/1695942-competition-landscape-looks-much-brighter-for-sunshine-heart-after-stem-cell-therapy-failure?

But, did he get the facts right (?), is this nom de plume a legitimate author or a "short" plant (?), or is this just a "spurious" article that … as usual, S/A did … not validate or verify and seeks to "legitimize the "shrills" of shorting.

NeoStem (NBS) has run … "fast and furious" … lately in price appreciation which made it a "target" for the short sellers. But, many of the SeekingAlpha articles … don't establish the facts and obscure the facts … blatantly to the retail universe - who in many cases do not know the difference!

I find it hard to claim the Capricor's (CADUCEUS) cells didn't work …there was actually a positive signal for efficacy, but study was very small so subject to type 2 error - plainly said it was too small of a trial to document benefits in clinical outcomes, so the fact that it didn't do so is expected. If the control group had such high event rates … a clinical benefit was shown that would be a problem!

But just for the sake of discussion let's say that the Caduceus cells don't work -- why should AMR-001? <to address this question one needs to ignore the fact that this entertains a notion that one cell's failure or success predicts the fate of others - no one would posit this about small molecules or biologics>.

NBS' CD34 cell, the therapeutic being testing in the P2 study, is one of the principal cells that are naturally called upon during any ischemic insult to help protect/repair the vasculature. That story is very well documented and it has been reiterated by multiple labs in pre-clinical and clinical models.

At least 4 randomized double-blinded, controlled human clinical trials have shown a positive signal for efficacy and safety of CD34 cell therapy for ischemic tissue repair. Is there any other CV cell therapy that has that track record? Even those not intentionally studying CD34 cells have shown the relationship between CD34 cell content and clinical outcome in their studies (Zeiher, Perin).

By comparison the cardiosphere is a melange of cells not defined in nature by a response to injury as far as we know - the cardiosphere itself was created as a result of the development of manufacturing methods to derive a cell product containing potential progenitors and repair cells. One of the best characterized and perhaps most potent of the cells contained within cardiospheres, ckit+ cells, are likely a minority of those delivered. An autologous prep of cardiospheres showed a positive signal of bioactivity in the clinical trial and could work for cardiac repair even though there may be variable potency due to the manufacturing method.

Notably Capricor has shifted to an allogeneic approach for which there is no human data at this time.

In essence comparing NBS' CD34 cells to the cells of Caduceus is not rational and using what amounts to a positive study to claim negativity of the field belies some other purpose than scientific discourse.

And … this is NOT the first case of misrepresented and misconstrued facts from SeekingAlpha!

Should FINRA investigate the "significance" of Seeking Alpha's participation in "running the shares" in this market?

SeekingAlpha … seems so proud to say … Probio is one of their contributors! Have they forgotten that they are creating "animosity" of the RegMed universe - in their "selectivity" of contributors?

If … I have "something" to say and I usually do - I put my name on the article for context and attribution!

NBS came back and closed at $8.27 DOWN -$10.59% to $8.27 after having a day's range of $7.88 to $9.89 with a share volume of 1.5 M shares compared with the average 3 month volume of 283.67 K shares after a previous close of $9.25.

As I stated in the mid-day … NeoStem (NASDAQ: NBS) … was jumping on patent news until a "SHORT SALE" Uptick Rule 201 was put into effect … since it was "spiking" DOWN.

NeoStem's (NYSE MKT: NBS) was … once again … subject to short selling restrictions …The short sale rule 201 was put into effect just at 11:47 am. This alternative uptick rule is designed to restrict short selling from further driving down the price of a stock that has dropped more than 10% in one day. It will enable long sellers to stand in the front of the line and sell their shares before any short sellers once the circuit breaker is triggered. The rule is designed to preserve investor confidence and promote market efficiency, recognizing short selling can potentially have both a beneficial and a harmful impact on the market.

Reiterating a 94 <from 90> relative strength factor. BUY NBS on dips!

Trading UP to name a few were: BioLife Solutions (OTC: BLFS) +$0.03 to $0.79, BioTime (NYSE MKT: BTX) +$0.17 to $3.96, Geron (NASDAQ:GERN) +$0.26 to $2.25, Harvard Bio (NASDAQ:HBIO) +$0.01 to $5.40, Pluristem (NASDAQ:PSTI) +$0.21 to $3.43 and StemCells (STEM) +$0.06 to $1.79 and Verastem (NASDAQ:VSTM) +$0.25 to $13.96.

Trading DOWN to name more than a few were: Aastrom (ASTM), Athersys (NASDAQ:ATHX), bluebird bio (NASDAQ:BLUE), Cytori (NASDAQ:CYTX), Medistem (PINK: MEDS), NeoStem (NASDAQ: NBS), Neuralstem (NYSE MKT: CUR), Northwest Bio (OTCQB:NWBO), Opexa (OPXA), Osiris (NASDAQ:OSIR), Sangamo (NASDAQ:SGMO) and Stemline (NASDAQ:STML).

Early Movers - equities were NEUTRAL with 18 red (down), 18 green (ups) and 7 black (flats).

Mid-Day - equities were NEGATIVE with 19 red (downs), 15 green (ups) and 6 black (flats).

At the Close - equities were NEGATIVE with 25 red (downs), 15 green (ups) and 2 black (flats).

In the broader market … stocks eased off their session highs Monday, but the Dow and S&P 500 were still within 1% of hitting their all-time highs following news that Larry Summers had pulled out of the race to be the next head of the Fed.

The NASDAQ closed DOWN -4.33 (-0.12%) to 3,717.85 while the DOW was UP +118.72 (+0.77%) to 15,494.78. The CBOE Volatility <fear factor> Index (VIX) bopped to near 14.

Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.