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.
Yes, saw that Irish study.
Though somewhat counterintuitively the Mediterranean countries often have worse Vit D deficiency than the Northern European countries.
Can I suggest you add Dr Shiva to your research.
Yes. Agree with that. They need to demonstrate that the handful of patients with IDH mutation were spread across both arms at approx the same percentage. And they probably were, because of the matching age stratification across arms.
And you would hope that treatment / control OS delta would be broadly the same for the 5% mutated as it is for the 95% wildtype.
(I could see a narky regulator suggesting that because of the small mutated numbers, the treatment effect has only been properly demonstrated on wild type. Which could possibly mean approval for the 95% and not the 5%. But unlikely.)
Most of the best critiques of the EF-14 trial that were posted here were also authored here!
But here's one by Timothy Cloughesy where he very politely questions the trial and its outcome. And he basically concludes that it should not become part of established SOC.
https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/5464445
And here's one by our old friend Wolfgang Wick which is slightly less polite, but raises the same doubts basically:-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4767251/
It's not that important really for the trial.
The likelihood is that 95% of trial subjects are wildtype.
And the 5% with IDH mutation are way too small a group to draw any meaningful conclusions.
They said as much two years ago in JTM:-
Should anyone be interested, Cobra Biologics (owned by Cognate) is part of the consortium with probably the lead vaccine candidate in the UK.
And now that consortium has signed up with Astra Zeneca:-
I do hope all trial data query resolution can be achieved by online means.
UK (unenviable combination of lockdown and highest deaths in Europe) announces all incoming flight passengers have to go into 14 day mandatory quarantine. Tens of thousands have flown in during the lockdown with no such restriction. So restrictions are now being ratcheted up.
Such a curious way of going about things.
UK airports suggested that a mandatory quarantine "would not only have a devastating impact on the UK aviation industry, but also on the wider economy".
And the quarantine measure will 'kill air travel'
This is proposed from the end of the month and to continue indefinitely...
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-bring-14-day-quarantine-210008939.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52594023
Not quite the picture you painted...
Sweden may not have a need to implement such a crippling measure, when it makes a sensible pragmatic decision to re-open borders a month or two down the line.
Do you still believe that you can put the genie back in the bottle?
One hopes none of this adversely impacts NWBO's timeline, but one also has doubts about that.
It is interesting just why NY was hit with such a tragic tsunami.
I wonder how late they were in cancelling sporting events or pop concerts with large attendances.
A densely packed mass crowd who are maybe shouting or singing is the perfect cauldron for virus transmission.
As indeed is a crowded subway train.
Plus Broadway, of course.
Plus lots of incoming international air travellers into NY.
When and wherever social distancing was introduced, infections continued but at a a reduced rate.
Plus (and it's really only my hypothesis) you can get infected with the virus, but only with a small infection. (Maybe when you use a cash till and pick up a low level infection from using the keypad)
In other words, a small viral load.
(Very different to someone shouting in your ear at the Aqueduct racetrack, for example.)
And if your immune system is effective enough to handle a small viral load, you will be OK, and if you're young enough you will have minimal or no symptoms, but you will develop antibodies.
(Which is basically the principal behind many vaccines, where you receive an attenuated dose of the pathogen.)
Social distancing measures perhaps led to most new infections becoming mild ones because of low viral load.
And indeed use of masks was a very sensible idea from the outset.
But WHO advised against the general public using them.
As did the BBC in the UK...
I also think that maybe the virus is simply losing virulence over time.
Trial participants obviously still don't know what arm they were on.
Perhaps they will never be informed; I don't know what the protocol is around that.
And that's the main reason you don't hear.
Perhaps you missed the recent tweet from Kristyn about her Dad.
It’s almost golf season! Just getting Dad warmed up. Dad was dx with GBM in July 2014. Thanks $NWBO & #DCVax for another season ❤️ pic.twitter.com/tfOXVMa6Zn
— Kristyn Power, CFA (@KristynPower) May 7, 2020
He's not available right now.
Fauci started funding the Wuhan lab after the NIH placed a moratorium on studies of these 'gain of function' pathogens in the US, back in 2014.
From a ScienceMag report dated Dec 19th 2017:-
I wouldn't put it that strong myself.
Surely any CRO can avail themselves of someone who is at least in the right country.
And the lead investigators on both sides of the pond should be able to exert due influence to iron out unjustified delay.
But it only takes one officious high level hospital administrator to get in the way..
This time they laid out a fairly specific roadmap with target dates.
If the silence means they are bang on track, then great.
But if something does get in the way, they should tell us.
That's all.
Yes, it would be illogical.
But there are many things about the pandemic and the various governmental restrictions in response to it, that are, on the face of it, illogical.
All patient data is critical.
You can't unblind, and then catch upon the last few anomalies.
I'm only saying that I half (three quarters?) expect this to come into play.
But let's hope you're right, and I'm wide of the mark.
If this proves to be an underpromise / overdeliver scenario, rather than the other way round, then great.
In total harmony with you on this one, Flip.
They have previously stated that onsite visits are required in certain situations where they is an unresolved data query or anomaly.
(I imagine we are talking about the files of patients still currently alive. These will require updating right until the last minute.)
So whether you consider it an excuse or not, it's not a new one.
Hope you're proven right, Gary.
But I have my doubts.
I had the UK in mind, rather than the US. It only takes an outstanding data query on one patient.
I think you already have horseracing from Florida, don't you?
Though probably minus a crowd.
Wonder why he is quoting a 10yr old study..
We won't know if poly ICLC is really such an effective adjuvant until it is in a properly controlled trial.
I did notice on the same twitter feed thingy that Kristyn's Dad is still doing just fine, which is very gratifying.
It’s almost golf season! Just getting Dad warmed up. Dad was dx with GBM in July 2014. Thanks $NWBO & #DCVax for another season ❤️ pic.twitter.com/tfOXVMa6Zn
— Kristyn Power, CFA (@KristynPower) May 7, 2020
In terms of effect on NWBO, I expect that lockdown regimes will cause some slippage in the timescale to datalock. And if that occurs, I hope the company will simply keep us informed accordingly, seeing as they have now given a fairly firm timescale leading to eventual TLD.
When I referred to a full range of test scenarios in the different States, my intended meaning was unclear.
I wasn't actually referring to comparative testing rates. I was referring to the different regimes of social distancing and / or lockdowns in the different States.
It's only in the final analysis, perhaps in 2 years time, that one can say which regime was most costly in terms of direct lives lost.
We already know that those States (or indeed those countries) with the strictest lockdown, will have the greatest economic devastation. And how do you calculate and factor in the longer term life years lost, due to a damaged economy and the resulting unprecedented unemployment?
You have to remember that most citizens who contract the virus never know they have it. Either because they are either entirely asymptomatic, or they have mild symptoms and simply don't get or aren't offered testing.
In the US you have approaching 1,300,000 cases. And cases just means those who have tested positive.
The actual number of cases at large in the community i.e. those who would test positive if tested, will be in the range of 10 to 30 times that.
In addition, it is now looking like large sections of populations simply have prior effective immunity (without any recourse to a vacccine). Basically this is children and adults with healthy immune systems. There is a clear and obvious linear correlation between age and Covid mortality.
There are several leading scientists, epidemiologists or virologists who argue against harsh lockdowns, and give the view that, in terms of ongoing public heath threat, in terms of mortality this may eventually become somewhat akin to seasonal flu.
Here is a Professor of Structural Biology at the Stanford School of Medicine, and winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Chemistry, giving a view.
He describes lockdowns as 'a huge mistake', at the same time as advocating smart social distancing, basically using something like the Swedish model.
Increasing case numbers is not a bad thing per se.
Increasing deaths obviously is.
In Stockholm, they are approaching 30% infection rate.
As they approach 50%, deaths will increasingly decline due to herd immunity. The virus will have basically burnt itself out.
So in their case, high infection incidence is a good thing, (as long as at the same time you put better and better measures in place to protect those who are most likely to experience serious or life-threatening symptoms).
That's Stockholm. In the more rural, sparsely populated parts of Sweden, the infection wave will continue for a while and so will deaths.
So Stockholm will have zero issue with coming out of lockdown, precisely because they didn't have one in the first place.
The stricter the lockdown, the harder it is to exit.
It's why keeping the reproduction rate below 1 is ultimately a somewhat daft notion and not a good idea. How long do you artificially restrict transmission by a rigid lockdown?
Forever?
And relying on a vaccine is not a good idea either.
Maybe one will be available in a year. But maybe it will only work for a year. And maybe it will only work in some of the population.
But I suppose it will further diminish the 'at risk' population to some degree.
There is no vaccine for SARS or MERS because as those diseases died a natural death, there was no incentive or profit in developing a vaccine.
There is no fully effective AIDS vaccine come to that.
Once Covid-19 becomes endemic, it will be only a little worse than seasonal flu.
And we really don't care one jot about seasonal flu.
Covid-19 may even just largely disappear like SARS and MERS.
Anyway, in the US, you have a full range of test scenarios in the different approaches adopted state by state.
So time will tell.
And bringing it back to NWBO and our trial. I imagine that in the UK, wherever a personal visit is required to complete a patient record and data file, there will be delay because of UK lockdown.
And if UK data checking and finalisation is delayed, then so will be trial datalock.
New infections peaked about 8th April in Europe and a few days later in the US.
Well.
Here's a couple more contributions on the true mortality rate. Between 0.1 and 0.3.
A German virologist, who undertook a study of all households in a small town location. 900 individuals. 15% tested positive. Mortality rate of between 0.2 and 0.3 percent. And they consider that conservatively on the high side.
By extrapolation that means 2.2% or higher of the German population are infected. And he calculates that in the UK that might mean 10m or 15% infected.
Which kind of makes continued lockdown absolutely unnecessary medically, as well as destroying economies.
So the whole 'keep R below 1.0' message, is simply ridiculous.
So here's the SEC definition.
(Not that I'm necessarily asserting that the SEC should be relied upon as a source of objective information.)
What is the definition of 'Ponzi'?
If you know, then you will also know that it does not fit the bill here.
Why do you constantly apply it to LP?
What are the generally accepted defining characteristics of a 'Ponzi' scheme?
If you know, then you will also know that it does not apply here.
If you need a definition of a 'Ponzi scheme' there are many here that could supply it.
Completely good news.
Why do they say 'admits'?
S. Korea and the rest of the world should breathe a provisional sigh of relief.
The only caveat is that if remnants of the virus can hang around that long, then additional care needs to be taken in selecting donors for convalescent plasma therapy.
Well, talking about the UK politicians; they're either completely dumb, or they're compromised, or they're complicit.
Though lets face it, 95% of the public have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker, so maybe at least some of the politicians did so to.
Economic impact.
Thanks HB.
Seen it. The vast majority of the comments are very critical.
It seems like the public are beginning to understand epidemiology better than he does.
How many times did he say 'until there's a vaccine'
From his body language, it looks to me like he knows he is defending the indefensible.
Back in 2005 he predicted 200 million deaths from bird flu:-
Glad you recovered.
But before Halloween?
A different infection perhaps?
Those questions were submitted to the ASM but were not addressed.
So there is no change to the previous estimates.
Cost to patient (if indeed it is the patient who is paying) is here:-
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=154790317
He didn't say 1 in a 1000 about NY. I think he said 0.03%.
Let's watch mortality rate.
I wouldn't want to predict wider infection rates in the UK, because tests have been restricted to those with serious symptoms, though now being extended to medical professionals. Certainly they will be a lot lower than Sweden.
But therein lies the problem; the stricter the lockdown, the lower the infection rate at large. Thus no real herd immunity.
And the harder it is to come out from it without a major recurrence of cases with symptoms and/or deaths. A second wave if you like.
Which Sweden just won't have.
Glad it piqued your interest enough for you take a good look!
And it's right up your professional street I believe?
Who did you say you worked for?
So I won't debate the science at the moment. I'll wait until I've reviewed all the available evidence!
But here's a notorious bit which you've probably seen:-
Yes, clearly there's a fairly robust debate going on right now about lockdown v sensible restrictions v very little restrictions.
And in the US you've got the full range, I believe.
This Doctor will be criticised for drawing economic conclusions, when he is a medic and not an economist.
But he is qualified to talk about the health impacts of unemployment.
Time will indeed give us better answers.
Testing is getting more extensive all the time, and infection mortality rate estimates will get more accurate (and lower, imo).