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.
The retort in this case is too easy. I've already filled my quota of snarky today (mx10001 was spot on with that description and right to call me out), so I'll leave it to another happy, shiny, optimism monitor to needle theDane.
mx10001,
No personal slight intended. Your posts to this board have always been straight forward, fair and inquisitive. Sometimes a post creates an impression, your parked car did just that. I only wanted to illustrate two different interpretations of a shared experience. we all share the same PRs. you see it one way, I see it another. Is the car growing or approaching rapidly?
It is easy to get so locked into a narrative, company going nowhere, that interpretation of data is twisted to fit one's firm conclusion. Someone points out a new perception, getting closer not bigger, and you will never again be able to "see" a car grow.
The time is rapidly approaching when the steadily released PRs of the past 18 months will suddenly result in a new perception. Nanoviricides has been accelerating. Step back on the curb, Nanoviricides is about to race by.
Crashco
Dr Seymour's response to a question about the significance of the UCLA presentation:
This is one of the most prestigious Nanotechnology Institutes in the world. I've been talking to them for the past 4 years. I think they have finally understood the scope and magnitude of the work that he has done. He and I will be meeting with people from a number of different departments such as Chemistry, BioChemistry, Physics, Biophysics etc. I know some of these people from my prior faculty position at the UCLA School of Medicine. The Institute is rich with distinguished scientists and graduate students, some with Master's degrees and many with PhD's. They have expressed a serious interest in collaborating with us on a number of basic science projects that will yield information that the FDA will require. The amount of time and money that we will save is truly incalculable. Whenever you present a new technology to the FDA, having a prestigious Institute and University behind you is extremely valuable. They will also begin to publish papers that will get us the attention we need in the lay press.More information will be forthcoming over the next few months as we continue to move forward.
And Dr Diwan is the singular and honored speaker. This is not your typical investor's speed dating event or industry conference. This is Nanoviricide's coming out party.
I hope you have rented your tux.
I hope you look both ways before crossing the street. You seem to have difficulty interpreting speed of travel. The rapidly approaching cars are the ones that appear to be getting larger.
NanoViricides President Dr. Diwan Invited to Present a Seminar at the Center for Biological Physics and the California NanoSystems Institute at UCLA
Get used to seeing the principle players in this headline share the spotlight. The combination of Nanoviricides patented technologies and drug therapies and UCLA's research capacity has tremendous potential.
I hear the sound of a finely tuned accelerator being pressed to the floor.
I takes a woman 9 months to have a baby.
Hire nine women and be done in a month.
Can we do that?
If we demand it it will be done.
Shareholder logic.
You have been reading this board for 2...3 years and you ask that question?
TOX materials are not being manufactured at Shelton facility.
He is. That is what makes the lifestyle accusation so laughable. The entire business model of Nanoviricides is an monument to frugal.
I agree. The Cox Alert came after the push and momentum were well underway. Cox' Alert was a nice to have and expressed in most definitive language what he'd been expressing in guarded (only slightly guarded) language for years. Diwan's buy was the primary catalyst along with contributing factors.
Shorts are behind the 8ball in a big way. Today's action will be interesting, there's a lot of cash at stake for those only interested in the trading of NNVC for quick profit.
There are more pipelines then FluCide. There could be PRs related to others before mid year. Substantive PR? Buyers/Sellers will judge with dollars.
This week's activity was here and gone before Cox article made press. I attribute to Diwan's purchases, Seaside retirement and less so Diwan's Lead at the Nano Med conference.
Review yesterday's hilarious back and forth between the Dr. and faux poet.
The content of JG36’s post was actually spot on. Testing and achievement of fundamentals is, in the end, what will determine NNVC's SP value. The post made no statement that was inflammatory or spurious. I would add to JG36’s statement that there are other fundamental milestones that are of value, study results and/or license agreements for other drug lines as an example.
As longs we can hope for NNVC's eventual success but that will be realized only when efficacy and a cost effective production model are achieved.
I do hope so.
I couldn't have described them more succinctly. (I tried.) Well done.
I bought yesterday.
I'm buying today.
...And travel half as often as Dr. S does in support of Nanoviricides, see if you can keep up. Too old? Please.
I've seen good companies destroyed by CEOs obsessed by quarterly numbers and stock price. I support NanoViricides for the science and the visionary goals of the board. Stay focused on the science, achieve regulatory approval and the SP will take care of itself.
I have a very successful 30+ year career. I am responsible to $10million plus budgets every year. I have a dozen technology patents credited. I'm trusted by those who work for me and by the C-suite above. Using a way back machine to examine my forward looking project plans, technology ambitions and annual target initiatives, I fail. Why is that? Am I a cheat, goldbricking, deceitful layabout? No. (You'll have to take my word.) Best laid plans...
In the delta between projects planned and achievements realized the wreckage of technologies failed and monuments to unanticipated challenges (business and regulatory) overcome. I plan, I encounter, I adapt. I grant Nanoviricides the same.
Nanoviricides has missed forward looking targets.
Nanoviricides has achieved unanticipated goals.
Have you met every professional goal and timeline? If you have, you set your goals and targets too low. If you haven't, are you holding Nanoviricides to different, higher, standard?
Assess their record. Invest or not. I'm long.
All the effort building a brand and selecting a slogan, the repeated cry of "capitulation this, capitulation that" and in the end some other crank gets all the credit for the word. It just doesn't pay to be a troll these days. Oh we'll, maybe your next word will payoff.
Before this board devolves into a math or calendar debate club let me submit an article that might reinvigorate intelligent contributors with a discussion of process critical to breakthrough medicine.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=trial-sans-error-how-pharma-funded-research-cherry-picks-positive-results&offset=12
Nanoviricides' science holds promise. In ideal circumstances the research and approval process is long and expensive. The cost of operating a start up bio pharm firm is high, salaries, testing, legal, manufacturing facilities. I agree with and support the managerial strategy being followed.
The lion's share of dissatisfaction voiced on the board is focused on time and cost. And charts? Pointless for tracking investments with so little stock volumes, so deeply dependent on science fundamentals.
I am betting on the science. As price goes down my holdings go up. I will continue to average down. I've been a stockholder since 2009 and until the science falters I will hold and opportunistically buy.
For those of like mind, good luck.
For those down and not confident, not interested, in the science I hope you are made whole.
I am glad you acknowledge, "The Bunny sounds like a broken record".
Shareholder Capitulation...broken record.
That's FluCide for those of you playing at home.
OUT, I don't recognize the symbol? Regardless, based on your recommendation I'm going to get some NOW.
Thank you. I didn't read your entire lesson. I'm hoping to retain my Olympic eligibility.
Testing is essential. It is the smart and responsible thing to do and of course the law. This article is an important reminder, regardless of specifics, that assumptions can and are often proven wrong. That believing something to be true does not make it true. "Trust and verify" anyone?
Nanoviricides is designed to act in the bloodstream independent of host. Nanoviricides are designed to mimic host receptor cells and therefore should not trigger immune system response. Test. Test again. Study data once in market. Make damn sure that what we are supporting as stockholders is offering a safe relief from illness. I trust Nanoviricides will pass muster. If you own stock you must also believe it will pass all required tests. I don't resent the testing process and I don't resent the FDA.
There is still too much unknown about the functions of the human body. To resist or short change testing is to put the people Nanoviricides hopes to help at risk.
...oh..damn...ouch, What the...a soapbox!? Does this belong to anyone, does it belong in here?
I wish there were something positive I could say, that there was perhaps a point in your comment I could cite as accurate and worthy of complimentary recognition before issuing my reply...but I can't.
You are wrong. Every sentence is wrong. The collective message is wrong. Please don't ask for proof. The history of medical quackery and more to the point well-intended medical mistakes and missteps is rich and readily available.
You post often and your posts contribute to the value of this board. Before responding in anger please take a moment to consider the implications of your position. Medical history is rife with examples that justify the need for regulatory oversight.
Wait an hour. Re-Read your post. Let this thread die a quiet death.
For those who might prefer an authoritative projection of Shelton readiness, testing timelines and product (stockpile) generation, please refer to Dr. Diwan's remarks pinned above.
Toxicity testing is essential, ethical and a regulatory requirement necessary to progress to Phase 1 testing. Nanoviricides believes the design of their drugs mitigate negative side effects. Time and testing will tell.
I'm referring to what I understood to be different durations of efficacy that were observed in various formulations during development stage leading up to what is today's "hero" formula (my term, not Nanoviricides), the formula that is targeted for toxicity and ultimately phase 1/2 testing.
Whether the varying longevity is the result of mimic-micelle formulation, lipid coating formulation or a combination of both I can't say. (I don't know.)
You may recall claims of potential prophylactic benefits for Care Givers. In those comments 4 weeks was the timeframe often stated. (Although, different formulations result in longer or shorter persistence in the bloodstream.) It is anticipated that viricides will clear the system in approximately that timeframe. During the 4 week period the viricides assist the immune system giving aid and assistance while normal virus/human cell interactions continue. Viricides tilt the scales giving the immune system time to develop natural and long-lasting immunity against the specific strain.
Another excellent series of posts that demonstrate the best of what an investor's board can be. Thanks to all for theorizing and excellent productive questions.
Two clarifications if I may.
The nanoviricides breakdown on their own in the blood stream. The immune system does nothing to wash them out.
Nanoviricides do not attack the virus. Nanoviricides are passive actors in the bloodstream. The protein surface treatment makes a nanoviricide an attractive linking target to a virus. More or less(?), attractive than the human cells they are designed to mimic but more importantly, by virtue of numbers, to be more easily available for the virus to encounter and link to. Nanoviricides flood the bloodstream providing abundant linking opportunities for the virus. The virus, indiscriminately attaches to the first host encountered with the appropriate protein link. If there is an action of a nanoviricide it occurs at this stage. In theory the flexible nature of the micelle and multiple link sites of the protein result in a "sliming" effect that ultimately rupture the virus membrane which spills the infecting RNA harmlessly into the bloodstream to be flushed.
If there is a improved immune response resulting from FluCide treatment, great.
If there is a preemptive, prophylactic benefit from benefit that first responders and care givers can benefit from, great.
It is conceivable that both statement above are true and the truth with open markets.
Mine is a business concern. Focus on post-infection treatment. Gather data regarding boosted immunity. But focus first and foremost on post-infection treatment.
Tamiflu is approaching the end of its patent protection. It's efficacy is questionable. It is vulnerable and FluCide can replace it as the premier influenza treatment worldwide. It's value in the market will wane and Big Pharm will be less likely to wage battle to hold the existing market position and be more likely to partner or license Tamiflu's successor.
Vaccine, preemptive treatment, is a very different marketplace. There are vaccine manufactures who will mercilessly protect their market share. Do not wake the sleeping giants.
I do love Gene's optimism. I like that he and Dr. Diwan are singing from the same hymn book. Successful 2014 Australian trials from self-manufactured FluCide would change the medical, and for investors the financial, landscape.
I am less certain of the vaccine-like immunity claim, although evident in animal testing, at this time. I hope it will be proven out. I hope the prophylactic properties observed prove out and demonstrate efficacy levels on par and as long lasting as traditional vaccines. But more testing and data analysis will have to be done before claims of immunity will be accepted. I hope Nanoviricides focuses attention on the reactive cure first and foremost. If immunization is proven out...it's too extraordinary to imagine at this time.
...and you didn't even see my lips move. Thanks Puffer.