NanoViricides Inc. (NNVC)

[changes_iv]

Zincy, what turned you dark on NNVC? How is it that you can tell on motives of people before events take place, especially the motives of those whose minds were inspired to develop nanoviricides? How many people did you know in 2011-2012 that were saying, 5 to 20 years before a NanoViricides, Inc. therapeutic drug will reach the market? Seems to me our small company is on the road to Australia Clinical Trials (2015). Flu season in Australia is May - October, 2015.

If it's due to waiting for enough drug to be manufactured that only increases the concern about why Diwan is currently talking about and investigating the possibility of leasing the manufacturing facility to manufacture other companies' drugs! As always, what is the most disturbing thing of all here is how well this fits in with a consistent and IMHO, highly disturbing overall pattern.

Since you can tell motives before events happen, here is an easy one: care to give us your best current vaccine technology evaluation in comparison with NanoViricides, Inc. paradigm-shifting technology? If all you have is a company that was incorporated in 1987, we'll take that...how many years ago is that? I'm sure your math is better than mine. Are insiders in that vaccine company trading the stock? I'm sure there are only good motives for insiders to trade their shares but if not please let us know, will you? If it is not too much to ask, when will NanoViricides, Inc. insiders start trading their shares? It would be good to know their motives as well.

I like the technology (although IMHO it does have significant risk). But the management and corporate structure is a completely different story. So many red flags I can hardly see the technology anymore.

And Zincy, while you're at it, what is your opinion on Mauldin Economics statement in bold?

This biotechnology is so far ahead of its time, the biggest problem the company has had over the last few years is getting people to believe it is real. This is despite validation from many of the world’s most eminent virologists and numerous government health agencies, American and international. Imagine how revolutionary this biotechnology will be when it’s readily available.

There will always be a need and demand for vaccines, but many people won’t use them. We know this from experience. However, the existence of a nanoviricide treatment for a virus-borne illness means that treatment can begin after symptoms for influenza or some other virus-borne disease appear. Based on animal studies, we believe that virus populations will be so reduced that symptoms would disappear in only a few hours. Immunity, however, would develop in the normal 21-day period so that the patient could not get the same infection again. Some viruses—notably hepatitis, HIV, and herpes—might not be cleared entirely from the system because they hide inside various tissues. I believe, however, that symptoms will disappear, and the patient would not be contagious. When the virus emerges, however, it will encounter nanoviricides if they are in the patient’s system. Over time, there is a strong possibility that each reemergence will be smaller than the last, until the disease is gone. ~ www.mauldineconomics.com/download/transformational-wealth-from-three-tiny-companies

Thanks in advance Zincy!
================================================

Today, it is possible once again to bring about a dramatic fall in the price of oil, indeed, one even larger than occurred in the 1980s. And it could begin right away. All that is necessary is to abolish the U.S. government's restrictions on domestic energy production inspired by the environmentalist movement.
.
.

Abolishing our restrictions on coal and natural gas production and on atomic power would further compound OPEC's problems. This is because any expansion in the supply of these competing sources of energy and fall in their price serves to reduce the quantity of oil demanded at any given price of oil. The result is that in the face of a fall in the demand for oil, any given production of oil can be sold only at a lower price than would otherwise be possible. In other words, the price of oil would fall not only because of an increase in its supply but also because of the decrease in the demand for oil resulting from the increase in the supply of coal, natural gas, and atomic power. There would be a larger supply of energy in general and a fall in the price of energy in general. ~
George Reisman, Ph.D., is professor of Economics at Pepperdine University's Graziadio School of Business and Management and is the author of Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics (Ottawa, Illinois: Jameson Books, 1996).