Manufacturing submission for approval...check
Next step in UK submission...pending
Manufacturing for UK specials...check
Plan for expanded manufacturing for EU...in progress

To the point, and then good by for now it is a point that I continue to make.

There is a huge network of interconnected latticework. It is not a law, or a regulation, or a rule, or a license, or a certification, or a treaty, or a convention, or an oath, or a benefactor, or the many patient stories, or a contract, or a publication, or a presentation, or, or, or...

I have never seen a physician put this much credibility on the line both as a percentage and as a magnitude.

You know, she has her own statistician, you know.

I wonder how that works? I really do. I don’t have a clue. Does she retain access since, you know, she and they probably retain something, right? I mean, why would they give this away, would they? How much was the license agreement? I mean you’d be crazy, wouldn’t you?

Oh well, back to the first question, would NWBO have to pay her or is the ongoing work part of the proverbial deal? Do any of these questions tarnish or strengthen your belief in the technology and the data? Does it change your views on gene therapy that cures blindness? How about one that cures pediatric muscular dystrophy? Should those studies be placebo controlled? Really?

How about a small piece of most anything that you inject in your body? Does that change your views on those drugs or devices?

There I go spewing again. Sorry folks, I have some TV to watch.

I suppose that too is a possibility. One cannot eliminate any possibility no matter how outlandish at this point in time. Anything could happen, tick tock, eleven o’clock. Boy would Linda have egg on her face. Boy, oh boy.

Linda M. Liau, MD, PhD, MBA, FAANS is an American neurosurgeon, neuroscientist, and the W. Eugene Stern Chair of the Department of Neurosurgery at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. Dr. Liau was elected to the Society of Neurological Surgeons in 2013 and the National Academy of Medicine in 2018. Dr. Linda Liau is the recipient of the Abhijit Guha Award at SNO 2018 for her outstanding scientific contributions with clinical and research relevance in the field of brain tumors. In 2021, Dr Liau served as primary editor on a book titled, Brain Tumor Immunotherapy.

Please join me in welcoming Dr. Liau as she discusses....what does she discuss? I guess that may depend on when and where? I don’t think she would stop with the statistical model and just walk away for ever, do you? Allow me a few guesses?

PFS vs adjudicated PFS in newly diagnosed GBM correlation to OS and implications to future study designs

IDH mutation in newly diagnosed GBM, and its role in risk factor modeling in contemporary trial design

Partial versus complete resection and time to tumor progression, standard versus adjudicated results in 331 newly diagnosed GBM patients

Autologous dendritic cell tumor lysate vaccine in the treatment of pseudo-progressive GBM, a 5 year randomized doubles-blind placebo controlled trial, observations and implications to future treatment strategies

Too early? Ok how about?

DCVAX for pseudo-progressive GBM, A comparison of treated patients between two randomized, double blind patient populations. Yes, probably too early for this too, but it does not break the results in any way so I’ll just leave it here for now. It would be a way to provide external validation though, would it not?

Shall I spew more diarrhea? You know that is a symptom of a disability, a cancer, an infectious disease, don’t you? I ask that you please be a little more sensitive to our patients out there.

I have not read any responses since my last post. I am taking a brief break from a busy day. I noticed my post was taken down and do not understand why, but will repost since it took effort. I ahve removed what may be questionable to our administrators. I may return, I may not..

When one looks at 2017 and compares it to 2018 and reads the code that Dr. L left for us all to learn many, many things. For example, I once proved that the other Linda did not reach her OS goal any time close to when people thought that she did...

Fact 2017 median OS and 2018 median OS are equal at approximately 23.2 mo
Fact the last 100 patents ‘yet to come’ are enriched to 77% treatment from 66% treatment, more if you cut that to 50.
Fact the two curves begin to separate at 2 years, thus mOS is not a fair comparison between arms but KM25% maybe and the choice is arbitrary.
Fact 3 year survival improves by 4+% when about 93 of these 100 cross three years, about seven remain who will slightly improve this number.
Fact one plots the future which is actually the current by plotting the current at 30 mo where x% live and then the median of that group (i.e.m x/2%) at 56.4 mo and so on to give you 2017 and 2018 full plots which can also be compared through inference, but the final 100 are coming down the pike.
Fact the curves separate more and more as time marches from 2 years to 3years on KM which leads one to reasonably conclude this either flattens or continues to improve.
Estimated Fact 17-19% of the 2017/18 combined cohort reach 5 years...blow your mind yet?
Probability 24.2% at 3years vs 28.6% at three years, but measured over 8 years is probably close to significantly different.
Now separate early from late...blow your mind?

Something else likely happened among the 23 of the final 100 that did not happen to the 33 of the first 100. Comprende? This makes these two groups more different than they first appear. Now comprende?

You must read my statements attached to this chain and apply to the entire chain. You must not trust people hiding behind alias. You must trust your own heart and make your own decisions or seek counsel from a professional with proper training to provide you with such counsel. I am not that person for you.

I appreciate the advice and will remove myself from these conversations. I am long, have sold, and regret those sales. These biases should be factored into any comments that I make. I do not fear what I believe in my heart and try to share my passions with others whom have good intent. I am a human and am therefore flawed and ask forgiveness from those whom I have trespassed upon, and like many humans, have difficulty forgiving those who trespass against me but I usually do come around.

I have said my peace and I am patient. I read to gain knowledge and post to share opinion. You are free to take or leave my opinions as you so choose to do. I am not here to provide anyone anywhere investment advice. I am not an investment professional. You need to make your own decisions and weigh your own financial risk tolerance. I am hiding behind an alias. I have said you should not trust anyone would does so. I am not a physician. If you want medical advice you should consult your own doctor. If you disagree with me and have good faith, I will note that disagreement and factor it into my risk model and decisions and I do appreciate all advice that I receive even when it does not land well. I am a human and am therefore emotional. I approach this board in good faith and expect to be evaluated in good faith.

Peace to you

Did you reread the transcript of Lykiri which we were recently reminded of?

Look closely at what LG has to say. I must credit my best friend with this insight. And stck that in your ear and then your brain...

Comprende amigo?

Certainly, which is why one diversifies and plans for contingency like perhaps hoarding what some may consider gobs of money on the sideline in case one is wrong about some things but not others...picking up what I am putting down?

"I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."

Now take that and stck it in the greatest trilogy ever written, at least according to volume of book sales.

Yes, that is a possibility, as is what was posted in the referenced ‘wayback’ post and agrees with statements made in complete if one pays attention. Bolding does provide emphasis so I will try hard not to retort...

Rubbish is in the eye of the beholder. When one has a flexible mind one can see that possibility and potential are not as dangerous as one fears. Some are investors and some are traders. One of those two does not give two ships what you scream at me, but may take close notice of who screams at me and go way back.

I require that anyone reading any of my posts go back for at least two months and read every one of my posts and apply statements contained within to every one of my posts past and present. I am not giving anyone here any advice about investing, medicine, or anything else in which advice should be sought from a trained professional. Life however is a different story...

One should not shout at others, when one shouts at others, one should apologize unless that individual was not acting in good faith and deserves to be called to the carpet. One should seek to understand that light inside oneself. One should recognize that that light has a voice and it often speaks exactly when it is needed but is also often ignored.

When one shouts declarative statements, one should check the logic of ones statement and ask whether or not it is mutually exclusive of another’s and one should not trust everything told to one by IR because their job is to keep investors happy.

Now I don’t know, but I have been told if the horse don’t pull you’ve got to carry the load. I don’t know whose back’s that strong maybe find out before too long. One way or another

Maybe I did not look closely enough, or maybe I did. That is for you to decide, but I will give you a clue as to how I am thinking. The website was launched as planned on 4/28. That website is already old and needs updating....

Any guess as to the date it gets updated? Times are promised but some like to beat deadlines by about 8-9 hours, generally speaking.

One more, there are a number of ways to validate data, internally and externally, trends are more powerful when tied together with larger understanding that is not a trend, pseudo means to behave as something that mimics another but in the end is quite different. Often people who lie and half-truth do not stitch together complete logic because they cannot. If one’ is offering pseudo-criticism, maybe one should think harder before they speak because there are usually answers hidden in plain sight.

Like the idea that some people are magnificent and are capable of thinking through every scenario and bring forward a package that while new and difficult to accept is ultimately undeniable, especially to their learned colleague who have tried hard but failed thousands and thousands of their patients.

Do you see other LBAs in the 4/28 release because ASCO ALWAYS has LBAs, or are you not reading closely enough?

When these meetings are live the program brochure does not include LBAs. Instead, they are handed-out on a separate piece of paper, not glossy like the brochure, sometimes tucked between the cover and last page of said brochure. The website was launched on 4/28 as promised and only titles that are published can be released without prior approval. I do not know the penalties imposed by ASCO, but I do know other major conferences ban you for 5 years, you is not defined.

Some abstracts submitted as LBAs are reported in this brochure, others are not.

While I and some friends are not done, we are satisfied. I rarely in life drink from the same river as a horse, but I will walk a thirsty horse to the water.

What may one learn by going way back? Is it similar to what one learns when one clicks through for more detail....

Abstracts
Embargo will lift:
Proceedings I Abstracts 5:00 p.m. ET - Wednesday, May 19
Publish Only Abstracts (online only, will not be printed in Proceedings I) 5:00 p.m. ET - Wednesday, May 19
Late-Breaking Abstracts (LBAs), including Plenary abstracts 5:00 p.m. ET – Thursday, June 3
If study results are reported prior to the embargo date and time without first receiving a formal exception from ASCO, the abstract may be removed from ASCO’s Annual Meeting.
Prior Publication/Presentation and
Confidentiality Policies
Abstracts and late-breaking placeholders submitted to the ASCO meeting must comply with ASCO's Prior Presentation/Publication and Confidentiality Policies. Read the complete policy and guidance for policy exceptions and press releases: https://meetings.asco.org/am/abstract- policies.
Press Releases on Annual Meeting Abstracts PRESS RELEASES ANNOUNCING ABSTRACT ACCEPTANCE Once an abstract has been officially accepted for presentation/publication as part of the 2021 Annual Meeting, you are welcome to publicize the abstract’s acceptance. However, you cannot provide the abstract title or session/presentation information until ASCO has publicly released this information as part of the Digital Scientific Program launch on April 28, so you may want to consider waiting to issue your release until then. ABSOLUTELY NO DATA OR STUDY RESULTS can be included in this type of press release.

What I am trying to tell you doctor is that which you think began in November of 2018 instead began in August of I think 2015 if memory serves and decisions made along the way are fully explainable. That answers were already in place when we were delayed by IDH, that Linda knew this already and that she was building the future without question. That agreements are gentleman’s on one side of the pond, so one must act accordingly until one has all of these answers confirmed. That you can have both but you must do ASCO before the other, but that none of these events need be spaced out in time unless outside negotiations dictate. But by that same logic, outside forces would NEVER miss the chance to present at ASCO while the investment world gawks at the truthsayers of our planet who enforce the truth through pimping their peers if one steps out of line but lavishes one when one serves mankind.

I tip my hat to you and hope that we can meet in KZOO or Battlecreek one evening this summer to plot our next adventure.

PQR

The prediction about the future state that I made in that first post and occurred before I realized he replied to a stream that is based on the questions that I asked in the other stream about typical discourse, as in my comments about the KM curve and predicting future are similarly based on that which you cannot see but you can understand. Predicting the future is always speculation no matter how likely.

One more and it is important.

I do thank you my ex-friend and I do thank you sincerely. For you have caused all of us to look deep and to question until we questioned no more. It is never too late to come to the table and join us here, and I am not talking in the Northwest as I believe that ship has sailed, but maybe not yet.

Here is one thing you forced me to learn. You made me take my understanding of KM predictability one step further when we discussed 2017 & 2018 data like if you make it 30 months the the median is... and with those four or five points I did accurately predict the future, except that the 17-19% alive at 5 years is an underestimation because of the final 100 coming who were enriched with DCVAX who as we both know by those same data sets are performing about 4-5% raw % better than those that came before. So stick that in your brain, and listen to what We have discussed.

I bet Bono did not know he was writing a song about Linda Liau when he wrote it, but he would agree that none of this...none of it has happened by accident.

And to my friend in Philadelphia and my friends elsewhere on this board, for tonight...I rest my case.

Goodtime, please read my last few posts and we will continue this discussion when we next meet. I want to see if you retain your position after all of this. Is it all a coincidence? Has any of it ever been? I just don’t believe you. That is all. I really don’t so I will ask again to discuss, and I will learn to ask better questions, ok?

While I have already said, I cannot predict the future. What I can do is remind you of things you already know. If you don’t, then I ask you to look within and follow this very different stream back to its origin and listen.

I will however make a prediction which I do declare... when the next book is written, there will be a new name etched in stone and it will be above Dr. Saulk despite building open Dr. Saulk. Many of you have already seen her face, most of those have heard her speak. Most of us have read her word. While she does support herself with reference to others, she need not do that because all of her peers do trust those little tiny, tiny words at the bottom of the slide, even when she forgets. There are GREAT pillars upon which this house is built. Now I instruct you to read back, listen, and apply the understanding, as well as all statements that I have made today including the ones when I say...please, do not trust me...trust

BTW pqr. I meant to ask some time ago. Did you read the other stream connected to the original stream? I request that you please read and apply all statements that I have added to those chains. That one is very much speculation.

There once was a day where journalists were only to be trusted if and when they suported their statements by others and based on facts....oops that still does exist and it is called medicine. Anyone with an appreciation of physicians understands what I am saying.

Again. I instruct you to read everything I say with doubt as I am hiding behind an alias. Please do not take anything that I say as advice no matter how persuasive I may seem because I am just providing opinions based on assumptions and I try to question what I do not know as fact myself. You must read back to the origin of this chain and you must apply everything within to and to everything connected to it in the future, written by me of course as I cannot verify Iwasadiver whether or not not I believe the doctor. You must also apply my instructions, however, to the above mentioned alias unless that alias instructs you otherwise as I assume he too is not providing me advice professionally or otherwise. Period. All connotations included as to protect both he and I. I am not an attorney and request any statements written by me and attached to me by iwasadiver or vice versa to be interpreted in good faith. Unless otherwise indicated by the above mentioned alias.

Thanks, doctor but I can’t take cedit for others work. Thank Dr. Thorlund and Dr. Liau brought to you (and by Dr. Bala). All I did was share what any professional would do for another professional. I summarized the findings for you after reading the article and what I take to be fact regarding transcripts and slides. I think it is Senti to thank for the limited oral history..

Again please... I instruct you to read the linked history above back to its origin where I make statements that must be understood along with any opinion based off my statements above. I am not providing professional or other advice to anyone here. Do everything outlined at your own risk including trusting the above information.

Good doctor, I agree with you that this picture isn’t just any picture to paint, it is a picture that will hang in museums for ever. We can disagree as gentlemen about how this gets accomplished.

When describing normal data, one generally describes it as ‘releasing data’, but here it has been described as ‘unveiling’ results because a TRUTH is being revealed to the world of medicine, not truth in the meaning that has been bastardized of recent years, i.e., a fact, but truth in the connotation that this fact has deeper meaning, one that is in the order of scientific law, a new understanding of how things work that changes our approach permanently moving forward.

In this particular situation, the powers that be are being asked to accept two new paradigms, not just the obvious one. The first is that the path to curing diseases like cancer (and quite possibly beyond...think atherosclerosis) lies within the patient him or herself, it just needs to be awoken. The other is that when placebo seems unethical, there is probably a better way to accomplish everything one wants to accomplish by blinding and randomizing without exposing patients to placebo. This isn’t a new concept, but to your point as far as I know it is a new method for a registrational trial. I know there have been single arms, and reference populations, but here you are actually making the comparison.

The limitations of matching and propensity scoring are not much different than what is being attempted by blocking and weighting sub populations because natural randomization is not perfect and there will always be unknown variables that cannot be balanced. In some ways it is better. Placebo does have its drawbacks with data analysis.

I predict we have seen the last randomized, blinded, placebo controlled registration trial in GBM. Moving forward, FDA will require NWBO to accumulate a large real world treatment database of 5 years duration that will be used to validate the approval and then combined with this trial and a couple others like the Keytruda trial data to create the new comparison group for future trials. This is why IDH analysis needed to be performed IMO...how else will it be applied given the comparison arm(s)? The future database will be large, tissue will be saved where possible, and random capture will be performed when considering if an approach is worthy of being added to the SOC.

These same physicians that will hem and haw are likely the ones who have been blasting industry for running trials that are too short and advocating for a better way than the barbarism that placebo can be....trying telling a mom that her dying child needs to do this for science.

Well folks, here it is.

Those contemporaneous rGBM controls sure drop off fast...what are the implications? Hmmmm

What does FDA do with a trial that is clearly muddled but also successful?

I know you guys have been talking about them but I was not able to even open my mind to it until I was sure about the other. Hmmmmm very interesting, I also assumed that I could sell part of one for a big stake in the other but things seem to have taken a sudden turn of fate. I know you also said this was a possibility. It may be posturing, it may be signaling, but it is certainly something because we have studied the helm.

It turns out all that patience may have paid off anyway as my favorite game show appears to be on at this moment. Chaos breads opportunity for those with a will. Now or later is fine by me.

Right now they seem focused on the repair side of the business which is quite nuanced and never seems to work as planned. That must be why I have stayed away. But the earlier human studies are starting to get where the business gets good. Damage and control. Repair seems a tough cookie to crack....maybe one that just requires multiple layers well timed and controlled. I know just the...

Doc, My simplified understanding is that DCs program; NKs are the accelerator and brakes (other things too but mostly that); Ts do all kinds of damage, in a couple ways, sometimes repair, and can really remember an enemy; and the bees swarm, tag, remember and do some presentation. Sometimes that tag is a harpoon but usually not, then compliments get in there and garble everything up. Macs are mostly there to clean things up.

That how I understand the generalities, so maybe I should take a closer look if others feel they have the technology moving. Let me know if I have any parts of the story far off bc it does effect the interest.

The possibility is quite intriguing...that could be the club in the hand to make the response ring.

Poor man, I am kind of hoping this post gets lost among the masses but you check you mailbox and answer me discretely.

Can relative percent ownership give clues into other relative evaluations or is this something that would or could not be a consideration?
Are there any steps that should occur given various partner arrangements and m&a options that have not yet occurred but would give one a good hint about direction?
Can a stock on the OTC be halted? Are there volume controls and other market controls that prevent reaction on the OTC?
At what point do risks become so great that you make decisions to accept losses or go public and announce status?
Enough where days and weeks may matter?
How do all the interconnections strengthen or weaken the individual leverage and the broad leverage? Can you PR that you are in negotiations? How does this impact so many of the variables, but ultimately stock price and stages of release/reaction?

Poor man, not all my questions but perhaps you have an opinion on these...

What is the market cap of INmune Bio?
What exchange are they listed on?
What could Northwest Biotheraputics do with $45M in addition to exercised warrants moving forward?
What should be a fair relative evaluation and with what timing should this determination be made?
How can one company satisfy concerns of conflict of interest? Does this involve ASCO and or publication? Should it be questioned and benchmarked to industry standards?
What is the value of a combined entity? is it the some of the parts, less or perhaps even much more?
Do the answers to any of these questions provide leverage in a negotiation? How much leverage? Should share holders of one entity trust that this leverage may be worth certain compromises in the long run?
What are the broad responsibilities of the consultant under question?
Why is there so much damn chatter coming from so many angles all pointing to a single short span of moments in time and do they connect in an way to the other questions being asked by this poster?

Does Jerry know what he talks about when he says perhaps some say run away, others say better stand still. I don’t know but I have been told to read the statements included in the link provided below and apply within...

Do some people know how to ask good questions that paint people into corners before revealing knowledge and insights but do so in order to prove a point with good intentions, as well as understand both facets of rules and guidance and what reminders of them may imply but using the same logic underscore...???

See the attached link and apply statements within

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163690475

Do some people along with the help of others have the power to weave a web so complex that it has the capability to entrap even the most sophisticated most powerful carnivore? Are there causes just enough to make this person dig deeper that they ever imagined one would need to dig in order to plant that trap successfully and time that trap perfectly so as to squeeze every bit of what they cheerish more than ethics out of them?

Do I choose to align myself with that individual and what is my best approach to seeing this through?

Follow the above guidance

Proposal:

Add to the treatment cohorts of successfully completed trial any newly identified risk factors such as IDH to this population so that it may serve as a control cohort for future trials.

Obtain and test tissue from any ongoing trials for new risk factor analysis for future pooling considerations.

Will this help to satisfy outstanding concerns?

Create 5 year database to monitor real world safety and outcome. Consider collecting certain additonal endpoints to safety in order to explore pooling or validation of other trial sets.

Does this address that concern?

Can we shake on this? Will you put this in writing?
What can be done to satisfy other reporting requirements in this case?
Are there exceptions to any of your guidance?
How will we treat these conflicts moving forward?
Can we move on to the next questions about package requirements?

Do He even know what He is talking about or is he even remotely close?

See attached chain and apply statements within about advice.

Although I disagree on your opinion about venue and am trumpeting a ‘here yea, here yea’ quite loudly about ASCO, I completely agree that one should not have all their eggs in this basket and there are any number of rational explanations for ASCO to lead to no new news being generated. Some of these potentialities include publication, partnership or other entanglement or buyout, now up-listing, and many more.

I believe one way, others here with good judgement and sound rationale, believe the others and should be considered by all inclusive of trial failure regardless of how remote the chances may seem.

See the attached link and apply statements within

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163690475

Add to this the question of jurisdiction and again my lay POV is that you probably have UCLA and many other institutions; states like California, Delaware and Maryland; nations like the USA, Germany, UK, and Canada; ideas like the Hague and Geneva Convention as well as other international agreements some which may impact entities that are not within the direct purview of UCLA or NWBO; not to mention principles and the other connotations of the word law including but not limited to moral, ethical, Hippocratic, and scientific methodology.

What is the point to performing randomization and blinding? What is more blind than this double or even triple blind? What is randomization and why is it important?

Step 1: Collect multiple placebo treated cohorts from similarly captured criteria and check their concordance.
Note: Criteria need not be exact as it will be pooled to create diversity.
Step 2: Group cohorts into a super cohort of randomized placebo patients
Step 2b: Randomly sample from super cohort and test sampling vs super cohort for internal validation
Step 3: Externally validate super cohort against two failed treatment groups
Step 4: Break trial patients and super cohort patients into groups based on risk factor buckets and determine their relative weighting.
Step 5: Retain trial placebo non-crossovers for internal validation of sampled cohort.
Step 6: Add original remaining placebo to matched, sampled, validated (internally - externally x2 - internally once again) cohort for new comparison cohort
Step 7: Compare original randomly selected treatment arm to randomly captured, blindly selected, placebo matched cohort
Step 8: Repeat process for sensitivity analysis

How does this sound to you colleague, regulator, fill in the blank?

———————————————————————————————
Please see below statement and apply to any linked messages...

These are all my opinion and I am not giving anyone anywhere investment advice. Invest at your own risk. I am painting pictures and asking questions to seek answers from others here. I share stories, experience and opinion which at times may be persuasive, but you should not take any of these as advice to you about anything that should be discussed with your broker, investment advisor, physician, or other professional. This stands for all of my posts past, present and future.

Please do not take any statements that seem declarative or that have not been backed by links to facts as facts. They may be subject to a number of errors, including bias and false assumptions. Please understand that I own NWBO stock and assume I own any other marketable equity I discuss and apply the above statements.

You should invest at your own risk. You should seek medical advice from your own doctor. And you should not trust everything that you read from anyone standing behind an alias. I do not know what will happen in the future and do not claim to have the authority to provide any of the above.

I have provided postings in good faith and my views and opinions are expressed in good faith. Emotion can be involved in my posts which to are added in good faith. Please take this statement as such and I very much do appreciate the advice.

Anders, I don’t agree or disagree with either of you because you two are experts at a different game than me and have the stage here. I don’t know the intimate details of any of these laws, and I believe that you all do much better than I. But I like to ask questions and I am trying to paint the picture that I think a web of questions that seem at times distant but I think in some court somewhere can be interconnected and can be raised. There are many many questions that can be raised, and if the answer is a certain way has consequences and then it also has some sort of implications on the other questions and intent.

The house does not need all or depending on which questions many, answered the wrong way for a lot of people with a lot to lose, to lose and then for the house to tumble down. Then I get back to the pillars side of the debate and in addition to LL, AK and their patrons, you actually have two attorneys and a former CIA turned ambassador at the helm, not to mention a bunch of scientists. So why would anyone of these risk any of these questions when they do not have to? They have integrity, don’t they?

That is the point that I am trying to connect you two on, brothers. And it is a lay POV so forgive the nuances.

Holy Ship! We have both brain surgeons at rocket scientists on this team. You just made my day. TY

Has this connection already been made? For how long? What are the implications now? Are we talking a three way deal? Uplisting, STFD?

Someone with knowledge explain please the implication of partner, out-license, merger, or joint venture?

This one goes out to my mom for taking this journey with me and dad...

10bz, I am a doctor but not a physician, so depending on who is asking I either am or I am not. I almost always go not, but people like me sometimes insist which I find weird. It seems kind of like cat-fishing to me.

Thank you for this Doc, I can get behind that number and abeta. Of course, the company known as Northwest Biotherapeutics will never reach that number but perhaps the one know Merck or a few others will even exceed it when all of the puzzle pieces are fit together into a majority for all cure.

Doc, I became a believer in INmune, just not until after this hits. I will still have time won’t I? Or do I need to hustle?

My knowledge here is second hand from some of the true experts, but the idea that NK cells are innate immunity is bunk. They are mainly regulatory cells for B and T cells, up down and sideways. That sounds like one potent cocktail if you can train them right...I have no idea, but do they?

Boy oh boy...most everything that works either works through histamine or an addictive receptor. You probably would not dare that which is becoming legal everywhere so chamomile and valerian root may be all there is for you to try....I would look up valerian root beforehand bc I’m not sure the postulated MOA for that. Some say propanol works for one but not the other, I don’t find that to be the case.

I will put my head into this for you and see if I can come up with something... WAIT the answer is right in my face literally and it works but you keep needing more and more without holidays. It wears off unfortunately. Melatonin and I need 20 or 30 mg then more until it cant be good somewhere in me, although I have not seen a side effect at all. Anecdote.

Hello friend, I am not going to argue semantics that is what the word means. I don’t know but I was told by Swegen that it changed status on the site...no body said it wasn’t recruiting earlier.

The point being....she HAS BEEN recruiting with full knowledge. I am not going to argue semantics about the law because that is not the law she follows. Patients are being consented and have been consented prior to who continue to be treated and there are stakes involved however one defines it....there is that word one more time...semantics.

Do you get the point or need I elaborate for you?

Because it is the same point that was made when news of the halt hit....which was proven correct when the paper was published and we saw the last 32 enter while others were treated and even more crossed over...there is a higher law that you can turn to (semantics one more time) and it was written in Geneva

Randomized, double blind placebo control vs randomly captured placebo matched... semantics my friend, semantics

Good time, I know this is a repeat but I got it wrong the first time...it was never about my ex-friend @beginning. He is in the beginning, we are in the middle and She is in the end. The Gnostics knew this. I told you each time we discussed this that I will not give up. The post about the particle, that tiny, tiny particle that binds all other tiny particles together is yet again proof. And they did find that particle, remember they are quite literally my neighbors.

It is not the Alpha it is the Omega that counts

It is as always ALL ABOUT THE END, all about the end. You fall for the Alpha, but it is the Omega. Thank you Dr. MLK, Gahndi, John Lenon, Nelson Mandela, Stephen Beko as well, Mother T, Buddha, Jerry Garci/Robert Hunter, etc. etc.

I REDEDICATE this song to Dr. Lind Liau...her back has always been that strong!