Texting while Sleepwalking
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.
i don't know why we are being compared to this other stock. i looked at their headlines and they have been in human trials since April. I understand being frustrated here. Hoping that the RBL reasearch does confirm finishing results this month. Look forward to the IND with FDA to get us out of the doldrums
I agree. I think others have expressed that same feeling. This isn't a brilacidin specific study, however we will have in vitro results from the RBL on many different levels we can use to proceed into human trials. Raising money here was an issue prior to covid 19. There are dozens of pubco's now that were trading under $1 in February that are now $5, $10, $20 and higher (vaccines, diagnostics, ppe, therapeutics).
With liquidity back, hence the $6 million cash in the bank announcement as of June 30th, IPIX should be doing whatever they can to get into human trials asap and not brag that they got amazing research for $35,000. I keep flip flopping my sentiment. Ultimately I think our IND gets approved for human trials, but we aren't there yet
And if we are part of a larger research project with scores of other therapeutics and/or vaccines, hopefully we top the list across the board propelling us into the stratosphere.
Valid concerns but imho the data we get may not be in the order received
Look at the George Mason announcement when they revealed ipix paid $35000. The researcher said the very first thing they will do is get the ec50 value. That would have been the week of March 16 when testing began
We are all on the outside looking in, including ipix. I rather rely on the rbl helping to inform the planned P2 trial than anyone else, especially not from an ihubber
all i did was agree with the poster who i replied to. wasn't looking to ruffle anyone's feathers. i am just another opinion
Yup people are desperately looking for the next covid play. We are probably one of the last few that could cause a big explosion in pps based on preclinical validation
some preprint servers,
BioRxiv (https://www.biorxiv.org/)
ChemRxiv (https://chemrxiv.org/)
medRxiv (https://www.medrxiv.org/)
SSRN (https://www.ssrn.com/index.cfm/en/)
7465 Articles alone (from medrxiv and biorxiv)
https://connect.biorxiv.org/relate/content/181
After my call it is clear IPIX shelled out $35,000 to get the EC50 value so IPIX could proceed to human trials. The RBL and other labs did all other in vitro research at their own cost. What happened if IPIX didn't shell out $35,000 to GMU? Do you wonder if IPIX would get zero to very little updates just like out of PHRI? Basic logic skills here suggest RBL gives preliminary results to IPIX leading up to EC50 data due this month.
Re-read the June 11th PR - that grant says RBL is looking to explore Brilacidin as a pan-coronavirus therapeutic and to expand in vitro testing to in vivo.
From what I can tell, other than submitting a prelim package to Barda back in February, I don't see IPIX applying for a grant to support human trials. I wish I could have asked the question if IPIX applied for any grants on their own
When the preprint is made available along with the EC50 data, is that IPIX's time to apply for funding? Partnership? As of now, the in vitro data belongs to the labs with the exception of preliminary data IPIX received to date on it's way to the EC50 results.
Different way of looking at this to see why we are treading water. Aug/Sept seems to be the make or break month as it relates to B for C
Aesop's Fables "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" strategy
Just watched an interesting movie that is reminiscent of your thoughts. Which PR will be the PR that takes IPIX up for good
Great PR after great PR yet the stock only seems to tread water. Why is that? The pessimists have a field day taunting anyone willing to risk a long wager here. Flippers brag about their .02 gains. Eventually the trading range will break, but which direction?
What happens if there is another great PR and the stock goes down? Who will question the company even greater and doubt anything real will come out of Brilacidin for Covid19?
Fortunately what is happening in the stock market in general should propel us higher than previously thought "if and when" IPIX breaks to the upside. If any of you were playing the OTC back in the late 90's when Nasdaq was approaching it's highs, you will know what I mean.
IMHO filling in all the holes to the story since February should do the trick when IPIX submits it's app to the FDA for human trials.
He said there were many grants to apply for. After I asked if the rbl submitted a barda grant I didn't want to pry any further. He just said read the prs carefully.
I know my conversation ended abruptly when I brought up the message board, however I dont recall him ever pr'ing the 35k payment to gmu.... unless I missed that pr
It would seem once IPIX announces GMU EC50 values, then next imminent thing to happen would be request for human trials. I believe he said they paid the RBL an additional $35,000, so this should confirm the RBL is GMU
Having the pre print of the peer review publication data along with the EC50 value/IND (and funding) should be enough to get us into human trials
i was just busting balls of the resident liar. sorry. hopefully you get this message before it's deleted. lol
yes, it's a very comprehensive list
with 315 treatments (whether in trial or preclinical) as well as over 200 vaccines, you can see why this is taking as long as it is
Over 100 of the treatments fall into the 'other' category with IPIX
The person on the phone just stressed to carefully read the pr's and not jump to any conclusion that hasn't been announced
I called the company and spoke to a man. I introduced myself. He did not
RBL did not submit package to Barda. he said there are many grants to apply for
He said it was a very competitive environment for grants
He said based upon RBL submitting in June and the 2-3 months to hear back, we should hear in September if any grants were won
IPIX has not won any grants to date
He said the $35,000 they paid to GMU was to get the EC50 values so they can submit that to FDA for human trials. This helps determine dosing. He wasn't concerned about turn around time
I tried asking about PHRI but he didn't have much to say other than they do a lot of government testing because of their high level labs
Rule of thumb, if you call, don't bring up investment boards or at least save it for the end of your call
He did fumble and was talking about hospital data. I do have a tendency to trip over my words on the phone and I probably asked something in a way that he thought i was looking for different data
Whoever I spoke with was very nice and encourage me to call back if i had questions.
I did and everything you said is bogus. Shame on you. He was pretty straightforward with the answers.
As soon as I brought up investor forums he got short with me on the phone and said another call was coming in. Again, shame on you
what i find interesting/odd/whatever you like
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200605/George-Mason-researcher-examining-the-use-of-Brilacidin-for-treatment-of-coronavirus-infections.aspx
As part of this project, Narayanan will first determine the EC50 values, or the concentration of the drug that gives a half-maximal response.
March 9th IPIX PR'd that the RBL had received the brilacidin and began testing the week of March 16th
Why then in July is the company only talking about coming up with the EC50 values? There has to be a lot more going on at the RBL and PHRI over the course of 4 months.
Can't wait for the story line to unfold in it's entirety
bid whacking continues. when a poster claims to speak to a ceo who has an already iffy reputation with investors, this is actually doing more harm against the ceo then anything else. i highly suggest if someone does speak with Leo that they advise him of this so the poster gets banned from ihub. it's annoying. they did it in other up and coming covid stocks where he/she promised funding news that just never hit. i thought that poster's name looked familiar. i assumed it was stocktwits, but alas it was here on another play
when the bid keeps getting stacked in excess of 100k shares and they don't get whacked, we will move up. Low volume with such a massive PR this morning.
Interesting increase in BM overnight from 924 to 934
now where is that news about money, eua, trials, etc.,. you know, the PR that would close the whole loop. I am sure it will even name the PHRI, RBL and CDMO. What else will make it in the PR? lmfao. every key element was mentioned as being in today's pr.
please prove the majority longs here wrong. i gladly will admit being wrong. just wish it were a 2 way door. you know who you are
i
Why can't any of the pompous people who get the news before us confirm the pumpers news posts? Is that asking for too much?
Well it is a put up or shut up type rumor. Tomorrow will confirm what we are used to seeing from that poster unfortunately they won't shut up if it doesn't happen.
Whats there to gain by posting that now? Doesn't make sense but then again this is ihub and we are all strangers
LOL. We have all been there. As is relates to covid, brilacidin is in the home stretch in terms of validation so I will guess there will be more 'sensitive' outbursts over the next few weeks
Hopefully when the RBL preprint is made available, IPIX will be able to expand further on everything that has happened and about to happen as it relates to covid trials
I took that post as a hit on the resident pumper as compared to hating on the company or ceo.
well i live 5 minutes from him in Boca
i appreciate your efforts trying to promote brilacidin on twitter. would be great if the company would hire some millennials to try that route
I have been on your same page saying the company is not showing urgency, nor is the rbl shouting to the world that they possibly have an amazing therapeutic. Alas we are now a few weeks out from in vitro preclinical completion with 1 or 2 peer review publications and at least 1 preprint in September. Let's hope we are talking early September and not the last day of the month to keep nerves and anger to a minimum
Brilacidin inhibits the virus. This other company refers to blocking replication. Good for them but we can't just compare brilacidin to anything because it has a covid benefit. We are in the home stretch of patience testing. Just a few short weeks left.
here is a compilation of links - maybe one of them has the answer
https://volgenau.gmu.edu/news/583841
this one expands upon the $314,000 US Amry grant
April 18
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7165072/
April 20
http://www.ipharminc.com/new-blog/2020/4/20/brilacidin-for-covid-19-updated-overview-available-for-download
There was a special call-out in the April 20th presentation to this article which was eventually published online in June:
https://www.future-science.com/doi/10.2144/btn-2020-0042
Yes, I noticed a bit of flip flopping in the barda write up as a few others have noticed as well. If our data is as strong as been PR'd by the company, I think a waiver sounds logical. The June 11th pr said they are requesting funding for in vivo testing, which begs the question does that mean human or non-human testing? the company has announced more than once that it will be human trials starting in Q4
I assume the company didn't just focus on 1 grant. Maybe the RBL and PHRI are going after different federal funding opps.
I posted this link yesterday to many covid funding opps, however the only pan-corona virus opp i found was via barda.
https://resdev.gmu.edu/funding-opportunities/covid-19-information-and-funding-opportunities/
I dont know but its a question some of us have raised. Here's the barda snippet again
9.2 COVID-19 Therapeutics.
Direct acting antivirals with proven efficacy against coronaviruses. In vitro and in vivo
efficacy versus SARS-CoV-2 is required. The best proposals will demonstrate in vitro
and in vivo efficacy against SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV). In
addition to the in vitro and in vivo efficacy prioritization, repurposed products that are
already FDA approved or in late stages of development with clinical exposure data will
be prioritized.
Host-directed therapeutics, which indirectly inhibit the coronavirus virus lifecycle will also
be considered. Demonstrated efficacy versus SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and in vivo is
required. The best proposals will demonstrate in vitro and in vivo efficacy against SARSCoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV). In addition to the in vitro and in vivo
efficacy prioritization, repurposed products that are already FDA approved or in late
stages of development with clinical exposure data will be prioritized.
BARDA will prioritize candidates against SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV) that have reached
the TRL6 level, however, earlier stage candidates may be considered. Manufacturing of
products in a 21 CFR 210, 211 current Good Manufacturing Practices compliant facility
within the United States will be a requirement. White papers and proposals should
address any ongoing clinical trials of their candidate therapeutic, and how a proposed
study is different than the ongoing studies. White paper and proposal submissions
should address clinical supply of candidate therapeutics. Submissions that have enough
drug to complete the proposed clinical study and at least 10,000 treatment courses
available within 6 months will be prioritized.
White papers and full proposals that do not have SARS-CoV-2 in vitro inhibition data, in
vivo efficacy data, a cGMP manufacturing plan or a regulatory strategy that leads to
FDA-approval/licensure will be considered non-responsive.
Well if human data is considered in vivo maybe this is killing 2 birds with one stone. Monitor efficacy and actual results
Putting aside barda requirements, a good question should be is in vivo data against covid 19 required before the fda will approve an ind for human trials? It seems this was on the company's mind previously. If yes, my concern would be how long will they take to get in vivo results as in vitro data took 5 months
Your guess is as good as mine. This is just a conversation concerning barda. It would seem according to the june 11 pr we will only have in vitro data when the lab testing is complete and that our funding request would cover expanding to in vivo.
Is in vivo testing a requirement before human trial would be approved? Obviously barda funding says yes, but without barda is it required?
yup the principal traders know about orders being worked and all limit buy/sell orders as well as stop losses in both directions.
The June 11th pr says both labs will only be performing in vitro prior to peer review publication. IPIX also said in that PR "he proposed research aims to evaluate Brilacidin as a potential pan-coronavirus therapeutic, for treating SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV, including extending the current in vitro testing of Brilacidin to in vivo testing."
If the RBL is going the BARDA funding route, they must have confidence submitting the app this way will suffice. It sure seems IPIX and the recent preclinical data meets most of the 'priority points' BARDA wants to see in an application
The person with that large ask at .26 just went up to maybe .275
Is this a question to compare apples to apples?
IF so, look at the July 20th PR to see how we compare to Remdesivir
If this is an apples to orange comparison where we are expected to extrapolate data from thin air because we lack human trials to date, what answer will make you happy?
IPIX is getting bits of info provided to it by the RBL, which then trickles down to investors. We finally have a timeframe via PR stating RBL research is almost complete with peer review publication in September
We have no idea what's been going on at the PHRI which IPIX has told investors that it too plans on submitting a package for federal funding and it's own peer review doc
Why are 2 separate labs reviewing Brilacidin independent of each other?
My concern has been the lack up urgency since many other companies seem to have stream rolled through this process and have begun human trials for quite some time now. I feel our ceo is fish out of water and relying on others. I assume we rather go at this the right way this time then try to figure it out on our own (which the track record here is hit or miss). If you look at other companies who have progressed far down the covid road, some of which received a ton of money from uncle sam, have bombed from failed and rushed preclinical data.
Is a PR necessary to get a grant from the government? I can guess from reading this board that might be a lurkers opinion unless part of the daily discussion to understand some of the gibberish that makes it's way on the board that only those who are involved with the actual discussion will understand and then get berated by others questioning why so many off topic discussions develop on this thread. That's the lifecylce of many blogs. No, a PR is not necessary to get a grant
my advice has been don't watch tick by tick. if ipix gets into human trials, you will be happy you bought in under .65 imho
Thanks. I assume upcoming keys to look for in PR's this month
1) cdmo update that we'll have 10,000 doses within 6 months
2) in vivo efficacy data
I would assume that if the RBL and/or PHRI have submitted for federal funding at least one of the labs would have addressed 'in vivo'
or would previous data done for different indications possibly cover 'in vivo efficacy data"?
here is an overview of TRL 6
that i don't know. i know there was a little discussion on kodak over the last few days. maybe the people involved in that conversation can hypothesize something