(JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:17
Char Count=
212
INSIDE THE INVESTOR’S BRAIN
still required since a story will appeal to other people and appeal is whatdrives markets.”28
Leitner practices looking at both sides of an issue, essentially balanc-ing his frame of reference. He is aware of the psychological conﬁrmationbias that drives many investors to seek only information that supports theirbeliefs. “Very few people train themselves to look for disconﬁrming evi-dence. . . . What I try to do in my trades is look for disconﬁrming evidence.It’s a very difﬁcult practice, and I have to continually train myself to askwhy I believe something is going to go down, not why it should go up.”29
COMMENTS FROM SOROS, TUDOR,AND CRAMER: “BOOYAH!”
“I think I am the single most conservative traderon earth in the sense that I absolutely hate losingmoney.”
—Paul Tudor Jones30
“Rule No.1: Never lose money. Rule No.2: Never for-get rule No.1.”
—Warren Buffett
If most investors are susceptible to loss aversion, then how can theyget over it? According to a paper by Professors Seasholes and Feng at theUniversity of California at Berkeley, investor sophistication (measured bytrading characteristics such as portfolio diversity) and trading experiencetogether eliminate loss aversion over time. Trading experience alone doesnot account for extinguished loss aversion—sophistication must also bepresent. One unusual ﬁnding of their paper was that sophistication andtrading experience reduce the propensity to realize gains somewhat (by37 percent) but not entirely.31 Even professional investors, with extensiveexperience, may be playing scared—and cutting winners short.
George Soros announced the closure of his largest equity funds—Quantum and Quota—at the peak of the technology bubble. His portfo-lio manager, Stanley Druckenmiller, commented that stock markets in lateApril 2000 were, “now crazy insane, unbelievably dangerous.”32 Regardingtheir departure from the stock market, Soros commented, “Being the lastin, we felt it incumbent to be the ﬁrst out.”33 By being ﬁrst out, Soros wasdisplaying an eagerness to realize his losses and get out of a market that heno longer understood.
Paul Tudor Jones is one of the greatest traders in history. In JackSchwager’s book Stock Market Wizards, Jones comments on how his life
chap15
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:17
Char Count=
Loss Aversion
213
and trading have changed since a large loss he suffered during one of hisﬁrst years as a professional trader: “Now I spend my day trying to makemyself as happy and relaxed as I can be. If I have positions going againstme, I get right out; if they are going for me, I keep them.”34 Jones optimizeshis mental state during the trading day by reducing emotional interference,and one way of doing that is by cutting losers quickly.
Jones tackles the framing bias that leads to loss aversion by daily up-dating his frame of reference: “Don’t be too concerned about where yougot in to a position. The only relevant question is whether you are bullishor bearish on the position that day. Always think of your entry point as lastnight’s close.”35 Price changes are unimportant. Is there new information(besides price changes) that alters the fundamental outlook?
Jones offers suggestions on preventing trying to make back priorlosses. “Don’t average losers. Decrease trading volume when you’re tradingpoorly. Increase volume when you’re trading well.” In order to preempt anyurge to hold on too long when a position isn’t moving, Tudor recommends,“Don’t just use a price stop, use a time stop. If you think a market shouldbreak and it doesn’t, get out even if you aren’t losing any money.”36
On March 11, 2000, days from the all-time high of the NASDAQ, JamesJ. Cramer, former hedge fund manager, founder of TheStreet.com, and cur-rently star of CNBC’s Mad Money, rewrote his wife’s 10 trading command-ments. The ﬁrst of those commandments urged disciplined selling of losers:
Discipline is more important than conviction. My wife’s trad-ing was all about fallibility. She knew that a lot of her ideas wouldbe stinkers, even if she believed in them. So she had ironclad rules.Don’t let emotions get in the way. Don’t ride things down. Don’t getsmitten.37
Discipline is all-encompassing—it stops every emotional bias in itstracks. In the above quoted article, Cramer went on to recommend thatinvestors (in March 2000) take money out of the markets, explaining theywould thank him later for that advice.
The professionals above use analytical detachment from proﬁts andlosses, engage in strictly disciplined selling of losers, and cultivate humilityin order to prevent the emergence of emotional biases such as loss aver-sion. In the next chapter you’ll see one effect of emotion on thinking—timediscounting and the pursuit of immediate gratiﬁcation.
chap15
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:17
Char Count=
214
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
C H A P T E R 16
TimeDiscountingWhy We Eat Dessert First
“Our favorite holding period is forever.”
—Warren Buffet in Letter to Berkshire HathawayShareholders, 1988
H ow many people actually complete their New Year’s resolutions? It
shouldn’t be difﬁcult, but year after year, whether it is to maintaintheir ideal weight, save adequately for retirement, or otherwise ac-cept short-term pain for a long-term beneﬁt, very few people can stick tothe plan. They simply cannot defer gratiﬁcation. The difﬁculty people havein delaying pleasure is a result of time discounting.1
Time discounting describes the tendency to give in to immediate grat-iﬁcation urges—going for small short-term gains in the present while sac-riﬁcing larger future rewards as a consequence. What is fascinating abouttime discounting is that people intellectually know they will experience badconsequences from current misbehavior later, but at the moment of temp-tation their limbic gratiﬁcation-seeking self overrides this warning whilethe prefrontal cortex looks on helplessly.
The normal brain’s discounting function has been deﬁned by a seriesof economics experiments. In the prototypical experiment, when askedif they would prefer $10 now to $11 in a week, most people choose theimmediate $10. If asked whether they would prefer $10 a year from nowor $11 a year and a week from now, most people choose the $11 in ayear and a week. If they chose the $11 in a year and a week, and a yearpassed, and they were offered the opportunity to change their decision,a majority would now go for the $10 today. This pattern suggests thatmany people practice hyperbolic-like discounting, with a disproportionate
215
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
216
INSIDE THE INVESTOR’S BRAIN
preference for immediate and imminent rewards.2 In general, people aremore impatient when making decisions about smaller shorter-term gainsversus longer-term larger ones.
In general, the average person prefers $100 now to $140 delivered inone year, implying a “discount rate” for immediate rewards of 40 percent,3much higher than an average stock market return. The only rational reasonthey would want the $100 now is if they can expect to make a larger annualreturn than 40 percent with the money, which is very doubtful.
When the potential monetary rewards are displaced in time so that sub-jects are choosing between $100 in one year and a larger sum thereafter(e.g., two years), the “long-term discount rate” is typically measured to bearound 4.3 percent,4 which is slightly less than short-term interest rateswould dictate.
The pursuit of immediate gains can lead investors to abandon stablelong-term investment plans. Mutual fund purchases (when investors ﬂockinto last year’s best performers), short-term trading decisions (especially ina long-term investor), and retirement savings decisions are all often biasedby time discounting. Many investors pursuing short-term gains are moreinclined to pay premiums over fair values. Those investors who get a “hot”stock tip may rush to buy, even borrowing on margin, to catch an antici-pated share price jump. In the options market, short-term thinking (timediscounting) leads to options premiums out of line with mathematicalmodels.
Discounting also occurs for potential punishments, though this chapteris primarily about gains. Most people avoid small, immediate punishmentsif they can choose to wait for larger, later ones.5 Procrastination (puttingoff unwanted duties until later) is an effect of such punishment discount-ing. In Chapter 9, we saw a counterpoint to procrastination in which “highdreaders” will accept a large electric shock immediately rather than wait(and suffer the anticipation) of a smaller one. The effect in which dreadinspires higher cost avoidance is due to the immediacy of the punishmentson offer. The experiments that test the “dread” effect don’t require waitslonger than ﬁve minutes. Even procrastinators will get down to work andaccept the pain when the pressure grows too intense as their deadlinenears.
Not everyone is subject to the same discounting tendencies. For themost part, people fall on a spectrum, from highly discounting (drug ad-dicts) to gratiﬁcation delaying (the most disciplined savers). Furthermore,certain conditions predispose people to become more or less discounting.Cues that a desired goal is near provoke discounting. Time pressure incitesdiscounting. People who are self-controlled, such as those who are highin the personality trait of conscientiousness (self-disciplined, organized,and rule following), exhibit less discounting than those who are more
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
Time Discounting
217
impulsive. Among substance abusers, researchers have found that theirpersonal discounting curves are correlated with both their degree of im-pulsiveness and their addiction severity.6
GET YOUR HAND OUT OF THE COOKIE JAR
When I was a psychiatry resident, we watched an educational ﬁlm aboutself-control experiments with children. In the movie, four- and ﬁve-year-old children were brought into a room and seated at a desk. A cookie wasplaced on the desk, and the experimenter said something to the effect of,“This is your cookie. You can eat it whenever you want. I’m going to stepout of the room for a few minutes. If you haven’t eaten the cookie when Iget back, then I’ll give you a second cookie and you can eat both of them.”The researcher would leave the room for a few minutes. The kids would sitat the desk and think about their predicament.
Some of the kids would immediately gobble up their cookie. Whenthe researcher returned and didn’t give them a second one, they com-plained, “That’s not fair!” Some kids simply leaned back in their chairsand calmly waited, deferring their gratiﬁcation until they could double up.Some kids wanted to wait, but, almost as if by no intention of their own,their hands would creep across the desk toward the cookie. One kid wasreally tormented—he ended up sitting on his hands, bouncing up and down,and practically squealing in agony until the researcher returned.
The study tracked these kids for 10 years. A child’s ability to wait forthe second cookie was a pretty accurate prediction of later academic suc-cess and SAT scores. Ten years later, parents of the two-cookie hold-outsrated their children as more attentive, better able to concentrate, more goaloriented, and more intelligent than the parents of the one-cookie gluttons.The two-cookie parents also viewed their children as more able to resisttemptation, tolerate frustration, and cope with stress.
How the cookies were presented also affected performance. When thecookies were hidden from sight, children could wait longer. When theywere asked to think about the taste of the cookie, the children waited less.If they were asked to think about objective aspects of the cookie—suchas shape and color—the children were able to calm their desire and delaylonger. The authors found that self-control, modulated by thinking, beginsbetween ages 9 and 12, and they concluded that the ability to delay gratiﬁ-cation is an important, and overlooked, type of intelligence.7
A follow-up study in 2006 reported that children who were able toturn their attention away from the cookie (implying better cognitive con-trol over attention and focus) can better delay gratiﬁcation. The ability of
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
218
INSIDE THE INVESTOR’S BRAIN
these children to intentionally shift their attention away from temptationsmay be the key to their success later in life. The researchers speculate thatbecause attention relies on frontal cortex connections with the “striatum”(which contains the nucleus accumbens), the ability to defer gratiﬁcationmay be an “early marker of individual differences in the functional integrityof this circuitry [impulse inhibition circuits].”8
BRAIN BASIS OF DELAYED GRATIFICATION
Instant gratiﬁcation is the preferred choice of the reward system, while ex-ercising self-control and long-term planning is the function of the brain’sprefrontal cortex. Samuel McClure, a neuroscientist at Princeton Univer-sity, performed a brain-imaging experiment with volunteers engaged in atime discounting task. Subjects were given several decision pairs, betweenwhich they were asked to state their preference. For example, they couldchoose between either an Amazon.com gift certiﬁcate worth $20.28 todayor one worth $23.32 in one month. In a longer-term example, they askedsubjects to, for example, choose between $30 in two weeks and $40 in sixweeks.
McClure found that time discounting results from the combined inﬂu-ence of two neural systems. Limbic regions drive choices in favor of imme-diately available rewards. The frontal and parietal cortices are recruited forall choices. These two systems are separately implicated in emotional andcognitive brain processes, and there appears to be a competition betweenthe two systems during discounting-type decisions, with higher limbic ac-tivation indicating a greater likelihood that immediate gratiﬁcation will bepursued.
In particular, McClure found that when experimental subjects chooselarger delayed rewards, cortical areas such as the lateral and prefrontalcortex showed activity enhancement.9 These brain regions are associatedwith higher-level cognitive functions including planning and numerical cal-culation. McClure’s theory is supported by a ﬁnding that in prisoners thecortical regions activated by delayed gratiﬁcation are thinned. This mayexplain why their decisions are more often short-sighted than others.10 Ac-cording to McClure, “Our results help to explain why many factors otherthan temporal proximity, such as the sight or smell or touch of a desiredobject, are associated with impulsive behavior.”11 If impatient behavior isdriven by limbic activation, it follows that any factor that produces suchactivation may have effects similar to that of immediacy.12 According toMcClure, immediacy in time may be only one of many factors that, by pro-ducing limbic activation, engenders impatience13 and impulsive action.
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
Time Discounting
219
The implications of discounting extend far beyond ﬁnancial decisions.“‘This can explain why we engage in all manner of self-defeating be-haviour,’ Professor Laibson said. ‘The emotion centre says stopping smok-ing today will be very painful, but agrees it would be OK in a week. A weeklater, it says, ‘I know I agreed a week ago, but I still want to postpone it.’”14The ability to exercise self-restraint is essential for accumulatingcapital—according to some studies, those who exercise more self-controlare, on average, wealthier. Any positively arousing aspect of an investment,such as an association with opportunity, success, or imminent gain, maycause similar limbic activations to those found during time discounting.Emotion shifts decision making to limbic circuits and weakens one’s abil-ity to delay gratiﬁcation. However, strong prefrontal cortex activity caninhibit the limbic urges to chase immediate gratiﬁcation.
CHEMICAL IMPULSES
On the chemical level, opiate chemicals (such as morphine) induce timediscounting, leading to greater impulsive choice. For example, heroin ad-dicts temporally discount money more steeply when they are in a drug-craving state (immediately before receiving an opioid agonist, such asheroin) than when they are not in a drug-craving state (immediately af-ter using heroin).15 The addict’s impatience for a “hit” also prompts greaterimpatience (discounting) in other areas of reward processing.
Medications that reduce the frequency of impulsive choices includeopioid receptor blockers, which inhibit the release of dopamine in the re-ward pathways. Attenuated dopamine decreases the pleasure of immedi-ate gratiﬁcation. Successful treatment of impulse-control disorders suchas pathological gambling and kleptomania (addiction to stealing) is seenwith opiate receptor blockers such as naltrexone16 and nalmefene.
MONKEY BUSINESS
Evolutionarily, discounting may make some sense for the survival of ourspecies. Steep discounting may have been highly adaptive when most (ifnot all) valuable resources were perishable or were difﬁcult to defend giventhe lack of deﬁned or enforced property rights.17 Supporting this theory isthe ﬁnding that our primate cousins, both monkeys and apes, have greatdifﬁculty delaying gratiﬁcation.
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
220
INSIDE THE INVESTOR’S BRAIN
For example,
in a type of experimental game called a reverse-contingency task, the experimenter delivers a large reward whenever thesubject reaches for a smaller treat and delivers a small reward wheneverthe subject reaches for the larger treat. When playing this game, monkeysand apes do not learn to reach for the small reward (in order to get a largermeal). When the task is modiﬁed so that they are reaching towards a sym-bol of a smaller reward or larger reward, most primates catch on. It may bethat the sight of the actual reward ignites their limbic circuits, underminingthe inhibitory function of the prefrontal cortex.18
Professor Dan Ariely at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)designed a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study in whichsubjects were asked to choose between receiving money in one monthor viewing an alluring pornographic photograph immediately. Participantshad to respond continuously, by pressing a button, in order to avoid see-ing the photograph and receive the money. Ariely made the experimentchallenging by scaling the payments for avoiding the photo. When he of-fered small rewards for bypassing a high-quality image, more people choseto view the photo than to receive the (small) payout. Ariely found thatcharging higher prices makes self-control easier. The brain regions that ac-tivated when subjects declined the pornography and chose the one monthlater payout were in the—you guessed it—prefrontal cortex (inhibition)and also in the parietal cortex (a brain area associated with calculation ofexpected returns).19
In the modern world, technologies such as the Internet, bank accountfees, credit cards, and retirement savings plans have vastly increased thepersonal ﬁnancial costs of time discounting and impulsiveness. The re-markable array of desirable and immediately available consumer products,coupled with clever advertising schemes that appeal to basic impulses anddesires, may be important contributors to the persistent failure of peopleto save adequately for their own retirement.20
MAKING A KILLING IN THE OPTIONS PIT
In the markets, time discounting is most dramatic during investor pan-ics. The immediate short-term gain being sought is relief from painful de-clining positions. According to Richard Friesen, a retired options special-ist and former seat holder on the Paciﬁc Stock Exchange, during periodsof market volatility, emotional responses can become the major driver ofrisk perceptions and option values. At these times, investors may be morepreoccupied with licking recent wounds than taking risk. As a result ofthe immediacy engendered by unforeseen crises, out-of-the-money options,
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
Time Discounting
221
particularly puts, gain large premiums. This would seem to be the best timefor option writers and premium sellers to exploit investors’ increased riskperceptions, but sometimes the market’s fear is contagious.
Ideally professional options traders are conditioned to maintain equa-nimity during periods that others perceive as dangerous crises. Theyshould be able to maintain a long-term perspective even when otherssee the world with steep, fear-induced, discounting curves. Accordingto Friesen, during market crises “we couldn’t sell option premium fastenough.”
As Friesen tells it, in the midst of the October 1987 stock market crash,he and his options trading colleagues were stunned by the irrational optionvalues. The trick was to avoid going into shock while the entire ﬁnancialsystem appeared to be heading towards a cliff.
On that October Monday, the trading pits were eerily tense, loaded withbids to buy puts, but with none of the ﬂoor traders willing to step in andsell them. Friesen recalls that one of his colleagues walked forward intothe inaction of the trading pit and offered to sell options for an enormouspremium. Panicked investors and brokers under orders to forcibly liqui-date bankrupt accounts snapped up his puts. His selling price guaranteedthat he would make money unless the stock market dropped by another50 percent. Soon his ﬁrm was doing the rational behavior of selling putsto emotional buyers. According to Friesen, “Trading at times like these ismagic. You are standing on rational grounds and trading with a crowd inemotional panic. It is like an ‘out of the body experience.’ You know ex-actly what is going to happen, and can watch the prices collapse as traderafter trader sees the truth you already knew.”
IMPROVING SELF-CONTROL
“We don’t get paid for activity, just for being right.As to how long we’ll wait, we’ll wait indeﬁnitely.”
—Warren Buffett at 1998 Berkshire HathawayAnnual Meeting
Researchers have found that the best way to enforce self-control andreduce procrastination is to have an external rule enforcer, such as a col-league or spouse, who can set meaningful punishments and rewards foradhering to the plan.21
Another behavioral strategy for reinforcing self-control is avoidance. Ifa dieter walks by a tempting donut shop every morning on the way to work,he might shift his path to avoid the donut shop, thus bypassing the cues
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
222
INSIDE THE INVESTOR’S BRAIN
that normally trigger irresistible cravings—the smells and sights of sweet,warm donuts. Similarly, if an investor ﬁnds that she tends to panic out oflong-term positions when she checks quotes and sees the price declining,she can either avoid the information source or enter protective stops.
Professor Terry Burnham, co-author of Mean Genes, reports in thebook that he enjoyed day trading so much in the late 1990s that it interferedwith his social life. One year, he made a quarter billion dollars in transac-tions. He realized that he needed to use external measures to help him slowhis trading, and he tried several techniques. He used a dial-up instead of abroadband connection to the Internet, he closed his discount brokerageaccount (requiring him to call a human broker to place trades), and he oc-casionally had friends hold on to his Internet cable during the evenings sohe would not check the markets after hours. External behavioral enforcers,such as those used by Burnham, are some of the most effective self-controlfail-safes.
Much of the art of self-control is cognitive—using different thoughts,feelings, and memories to convince oneself of the value of restraint—whileother techniques are behavioral. For example, an ex-smoker may pine after“just one” cigarette but then call to mind the deceased grandfather whoseemphysema devastated his vitality. The association of cigarettes with thesuffering of a family member might evoke strong disgust and a reﬂexiveurge to avoid smoking.
Practitioners of neurolinguistic programming, such as motivationalspeaker Anthony Robbins, locate the emotional origin of one’s desire tocontinue a noxious habit. Then mental exercises are used to reverse one’semotional association from good to extremely negative. For example, ifone is unable to follow a diet plan because of a propensity to sneak bitesof dessert, then one should locate the fond memory or association drivingthe craving.
One may have childhood memories of being brought desserts by hergrandmother when lying ill from the ﬂu. To reverse this loving and positiveassociation with dessert, one can call to mind all the negative and damagingaspects of desserts. Repeatedly feel the emotional intensity of the follow-ing images and associate them with desserts. For example, bring to mindthat heart disease runs in the family, having killed one’s uncle, and recallthat dessert will cause that effect in other loved ones. Picture the bulgingatherosclerotic plaques on their arteries (ﬁnd photos on the Internet if youneed a reference). Imagine how the sugar is accelerating your aging pro-cess and weakening your immune system, predisposing you to colds andchronic illness. These are only examples.
For yourself, consider a habit you’d like to break, ﬁnd appropriate re-versed associations, and feel them. Then repeatedly feel how toxic thathabit is until the very thought of it makes you extremely uncomfortable.
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
Time Discounting
223
For example, investors might want to break a habit of falling in love withstocks (the endowment effect). Such investors should take extra effortto ﬁnd negative information or opinions about the company. When feel-ing amorous, they can consciously recall how badly they felt when otherstocks they loved let them down (and damaged their bank account).
IN PRACTICE
According to the Wall Street Journal, the best biotech analyst of 2005 wasMartin Auster, MD.22 When I asked Auster what differentiated him fromother analysts, he indicated that he takes a longer-term view of the stockshe covers. While most analysts look at upcoming clinical trials and prod-ucts over the next 6 to 12 months, Auster looks ahead 12 to 18 months.This longer-term perspective ensures that he is well positioned when otheranalysts turn their attention to events he had already priced into his rec-ommendations.
Investors can enhance self-control and combat time discounting byidentifying where they are vulnerable. For most investors, discountingdrives short-term thinking when they are feeling emotional (such as involatile markets). For example, a professed “long-term” investor may in-appropriately buy a stock due to excitement about an upcoming productrelease or earnings announcement.
There are many advantages to understanding time discounting that de-pend on one’s speciﬁc needs. Professional analysts can beneﬁt from look-ing out further than their competition. Options traders can take advantageof investors during panic, when they see only immediate danger and wantimmediate protection from further losses, at almost any price. Portfoliomanagers can remember to avoid being swayed by short-term earningsanomalies. Interestingly, investors occasionally engage in discounting col-lectively, leading to conformity in perceptions and herding behavior in themarkets.
chap16
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 11, 2007
12:20
Char Count=
224
chap17
JWPR011-Peterson (JWBK010-Peterson)
May 16, 2007
11:45
Char Count=
C H A P T E R 17
HerdingKeeping up with the Joneses
“Never, ever listen to other opinions.
To succeed in the markets, it is essential to makeyour own decisions. Numerous traders cited listen-ing to others as their worst blunder. Walton andMinervini lost their entire investment stake be-cause of this misjudgement.”
—Jack Schwager1
Never follow a stock tip. That’s the received wisdom.
But what if it’s a trusted friend with the advice, and she’s an insiderof sorts, and she’s extra-specially certain that this stock is about to
rocket?
I hadn’t bought a stock on a “tip” for many moons. I’d been preaching
to others—“Don’t buy stocks on tips!”—for years.
So I was a hardened cynic when my trusted friend from college (let’scall her “F”) told me she had a great stock tip. F works at a hedge fund inLondon. She’s a biotech specialist of sorts, and she had the inside juice onNeurocell (not a real name). Neurocell was a small pharmaceutical com-pany seeking U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for arevolutionary new treatment for Alzheimer’s disease. Neurocell had ap-proval for its medication in Europe, and it was awaiting FDA approval inthe United States.
Reported F, “