Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Absolutely, we are invested in NWBO (well, at least most of us, I assume).
And I invested in NWBO, because L is the most promising treatment for GBM. And given that GBM median survival is around 18-20 months, there is an obvious, genuine, and profound unmet need.
And we all know the possible potential of Direct.
And not only is L the most promising GBM treatment, it is entirely benign. No auto-immune dysfunction, no cytokine storm.
That continues to amaze me.
And that's because it's almost entirely of autologous origin.
(There's one or two things in the maturational cocktail that, in an ideal world, wouldn't be in there, but I'm aware of that and willing to accept it as necessary.)
Yes, it's called a vaccine. But it's a therapeutic vaccine, designed to treat a pre-existing cancer that is usually fatal.
It's really only a quirk of history that led to the use of 'vaccine'.
(The term 'vaccine' comes from the Latin for cow; vacca, and was coined when cowpox was used to create a 'vaccine' for smallpox).
So DCVax is undoubtedly a good vaccine.
And it would be daft to lump all vaccines together, so I certainly don't do that!
Why would I?
Hilarious!
Bribery comes in many forms.
Tawnya is clearly well qualified for her role.
Her education is listed as; 'Communication, Marketing and French'..
A very useful skill set.
I'll put up some more stuff tomorrow perhaps.
However, you can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink!!
So there will be a range of board opinions about this issue, and I've added information that people can make of whatever they wish.
There comes a point when, however much information you present, it will not impact at all on some.
Did you watch that last video, by the way?
Do you mean you don't oppose mandatory vaccination???
An attempt to discredit HCQ, of course.
And now the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) are suing the FDA for unlawful attempts to restrict the right of physicians to prescribe HCQ when they believe it appropriate to do so..
https://aapsonline.org/judicial/aaps-v-fda-hcq-6-2-2020.pdf
The drug that actually doesn't work and has noticeable toxicity is Remdesivir (projected revenue $7.7B).
What do you find difficult to understand about the disparaging of HCQ?
Listen to this Nurse. This section is on HCQ:-
She is well qualified in finance, accounting and auditing.
CIO sounds like a bit of a non-job to me, assuming the IT side is handled elsewhere. And she doesn't have the IT technical background anyway.
So she was qualified for the role she had.
Regarding the change of title, I'm more interested in the why.
I'm guessing it is some sort of interim arrangement anyway, rather than a long term one.
And seeing as she is working on S-OX, she is actually still doing CFO work rather than CIO work.
And it's because of these incongruities, that I don't take this at face value. It has to be about something else.
Hey laser, you had me going there..
361 is the new 372, I suppose.
No harm in asking.
No such trial.
Anything else you would like me to DD for you?
Do we have any pictures of her 'massive skill set'?
Sorry Senti. I can't take anything seriously at the moment...
Roll on Happy Hour privileges.
That's all I can say....
Oh for gawd sake, give it a rest...
A blatant example of the Australian PM overstepping the mark:-
Well, as you know Ex, I believe it is perfectly possible that they got a plain old 'continue' rec regarding PFS at an IA.
Just like Toca (though they did go on to fail)
Which might have been a disappointment at the time for the company, who were perhaps hoping for an early 'halt for efficacy' recommendation.
It's entirely plausible that the data fell just short of an early halt rec. (With a suspicion that pseudo-progression played its part in the falling short.)
If they indeed received a 'continue' rec, it would mean that they remained blinded.
And it would not mean the trial had failed.
Tell me I'm wrong, or tell me I'm not wrong.
So it appears that the monkeys were vaccinated first.
And then 28 days later they were inoculated.
And seven days after that, they were euthanised.
So given the vaccine first. And all were reported well for the 28 days. Then 'inoculated' i.e. challenged with the virus.
All were infected. Then euthanised just 7 days later.
Why euthanised so quickly? We know that in humans, if you become infected and later seriously ill with Covid, that happens in a longer timescale than 7 days.
Because of this early euthanisation, nothing was learned about the course of the disease beyond 7 days in the monkeys, and whether the vaccinated animals would have fared better or worse than the control animals.
Thanks, Lykiri.
Yes, agree.
Seems like nobody knows...
Lol.
Cognate completed their management buyout in Feb 2018.
Astra Zeneca now has the licence for the Oxford Consortium Covid vaccine, now called AZD1222 (formerly ChAdOx1 nCoV-19).
It basically failed in the animal study (all the monkeys became infected when challenged with the virus).
But that didn't stop the human studies commencing...
Read this:-
What do you make of this Lykiri?
https://twitter.com/UCLTRO/status/1238161125948166145/photo/1
(Maybe Mike in center of table?)
I'm sure SAP amendments are not at all unusual in trials.
Endpoint changes are not unusual.
And I don't think you can construe that because there has been an SAP amendment, that that means approval is any less likely.
It's well known that citing German tax issues is a euphemism for; 'We've got something going on'
Lol.
I agree something is in the works.