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.
NNVC is a pure winner!
With the reported efficacy from independent sources, NNVC's day in the sun will come.
I am not sure NNVC is the buy of the century. But just in case, I picked up a few more shares!
NNVC to shoot past the moon on its way to Rigel IV
Agree, it looks like they feel an itch. Sound be interesting to see how it all unfolds.
Best of luck to all NNVC longs.
HS
Karin, I dont know if you saw my ealier response,
but no publishment for the NNVC write-up. I am looking into revising and getting out somewhere. I have been busy with some extraneous issues and have had to delay action.
NNVC has great potential. It is not a sure thing, but certainly an interesting and real possibility. As I have noted before, my biggest concern is not their technology or efficacy or probably even toxicity, it is near term and long term competition. That is why I hope for a little faster forward movement.
Best of luck to all.
HS
For the record, I dont take the number seriously. The methodology appears flawed.
But I found it interesting and thought it might generate some buzz.
I am glad I was able to provided some entertainment for this Sunday.
Drink Coke! I love it! Pepsi is too sweet, Royal Crown was OK, but Coke, thats the best. Especically if I could get a true old fashioned soda fountain one that has the coke syrup turned up. Wow, those old fountain cokes at a five and dime lunch counter, you could not beat them. I have not had one that tastes like that for about 35 to 40 years.
dun dun dun ta dundundun dun ta.......... .. .. .
When I imagine NNVC's polymeric nanomecilles interacting with viruses, I cant help but think of this song going along with it!
I dont think anyone said you had to take it seriously, but if you take the pump terminator seriously, well might as well take this seriously also.
If it reported a 89.7% probability, I'll bet you would have a different opinion that you broadcast whether you believe it true or not.
Its like politicians with their mind sets.
Nothing Great can be achieved without Enthusiasm.
Dr Seymore certainly has that. I am not sure I want to see the comparison of any of us to him when we are 74. If I make it to 74, I want to be sitting under a tree with a nice warm breeze with my wonderful wife enjoying the day, not out there trying to accomplish a great goal for society while getting nonsence from gremulites shot at me from wierd angles.
Organ flat erroneous assumption
Thus, your suggested statement does not apply.
NNVC only has a 2.9% chance of Bankruptcy
At least thats what these guys say. Better that most of the others they list.
http://www.macroaxis.com/invest/ratio/NNVC--Probability_Of_Bankruptcy
PS to KarinCA - No publishment at this time. Revising and may seek avenue for publishment of similar.
32 per day, every day of the year for 10.7 years. Now compare that to how far NNVC has got in 9 years. There is no comparison on the value usage of time.
NNVC is the clear winner in that one.
Go NNVC
Thanks for the kudos. Although much of it is repetitious in one way or another, it is true to the best of my understanding. Truth, that’s what stands the test of time the best.
My goal in posting these is to periodically provide anyone new some insight into the positive aspects of this company and its short and long term goals.
As far as my background , I would like to make it clear that I am not a biotechnology expert or nanotechnology expert. Nor do I hold a PhD. I know a little about colloidal chemistry, which is a general related field, but I am not an expert in that either. I have a chemical engineering degree and have participated in the design and R&D of process systems for the last 34 years. True expertise I find elusive. I have met some unique individuals that seem to retain most of what they have learned and be able to use it and explain it at a moment’s noticed, even years after when last used.
I on the other hand, lose my fluency with a subject quickly when I am not engaged in it. My current expertise is more with fluid and/or gaseous mixing, gas contacting and mass transfer, filtration, reaction residence time distributions, and as well as some material handling like functional silo design, mechanical and pneumatic conveying.
I wish all the best and I certainly wish NNVC the best. Regardless of investment goals or successes, they offer a true value added product to society. The exact opposite of the wasted resources in this world; e.g. – this millions spent and made on something like honey boo boo.
Could it be the buy of the century? NNVC on the AMEX
Nanovircides, Inc. (NNVC) is a functional biotechnology SEC reporting company with shares traded on the AMEX.
NNVC is recognized on a commercial basis by the FDA and European counterparts. They are acknowledged as a legitimate and innovative company for the technical prowess and therapeutic nanotechnology drug development achievements. While they currently have no marketed products, nor have they earnings, they are in late stage development of revolutionary anti-viral therapeutics using polymeric nanomicelles both as their delivery and active anti-viral platform.
The basics of the NNVC ant-viral approach can be reviewed in Chapter 7 of the CRC publication Bionanotechnology II (ISBN -10: 143980463X).
Using their proprietary approach, and working within the rigid pharmaceutical industry protocols, NNVC has perform both in-vitro and in-vivo testing, as is required prior to human phase studies. In these studies, a high degree efficacy was seen and documented by a wide range of entities, across a range of viral types. This is rather uncommon in typical developmental stage companies. Many focus on a singular type as a target.
NNVC is however more interested in ultimately having a platform that can be quickly tuned and adjusted to target nearly any viral type, even those that might be highly novel or of recent or immediate surfacing threats. This has extended NNVCs testing phase years as they have worked with many researchers and agencies around the world to assess their approach across a wide spectrum of viral types.
Not only have they been proven highly effective, the fact that the course of their studies having being done at a wide range of facilities provides additional confidence that efficacies are indeed very real and not unique to a particular viral type or testing agency protocols, methods and unique handlings.
The following can be referenced as a sample of NNVCs achievements. (H5N1 & Rabies at the National Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology in Hanoi, Ebola studies with the United States Army Institute of Infectious Diseases, Epidemic Kerato-Conjunctivitis EKC, anti-Herpes clinical study with THEVAC and Herpes Simplex Virus HSV with Dr. Rosenthal at NEOMED, anti-HIV therapeutics testing with the University of California in addition to KARD Scientific, Dengue Fever tests with Dr. Eva Harris at the University of California, Berkeley, et.al)
Both in-vitro and in-vivo testing has reported excellent efficacy against the viral types targeted, with no apparent or significant toxicity issues observed.
After a successful pre-IND meeting with the FDA, NNVC is now currently in the process of completing the work needed to proceed to first human phase testing.
NNVC is also upgrading their facilities to improve production capability. This will not only ensure sufficient quantities of the therapeutics for FDA stage gate testing, but also for a wide range of researchers highly interested in testing the efficacy against viral types of specific world concern.
With the high level of efficacy and lack of toxicity shown to date in specialized animal models, and the expanding interest from foreign investigators, there is a reasonable possibility that first human testing may occur outside of the United States.
The FDA and the corresponding European agencies were also impressed enough to grant the NNVC Denque Fever anti-viral an orphan drug designation.
NNVC has redirected their efforts from time-to-time over their short history to take advantage of opportunities presented to them to evaluate efficacy against particular viral types of immediate or contemporary concern. While this has slowed their progress to human testing on a single viral type, it has served their overall goal well, which is to bring to the world an anti-viral platform to help eradicate nearly any virus at any time, of whatever type, wherever it might break out.
Their ultimate goal is not to have an anti-flu therapeutic, but a universal anti-any viral therapeutic that can be adjusted and applied in a very rapid time span.
Well respected doctors and researchers in their field have been impressed by the efficacy tests they participated in. Reference Dr. Eva Harris at the University of California, Berkeley Berekely, Dr. Rosenthal at NEOMED, as well as others mentioned above and/or available in the literature.
The Chair Professor of Ophthalmology at Baylor College of Medicine, and a Director of the Company, was asked why he invested a total of $7M ($7,000,000.00 USD) in NNVC during the 2013 calendar year. His answer was, “As I became familiar with the technology and the various on-going programs that the Company has, it became apparent that the potential was nothing short of amazing”.
It would be naïve of anyone, including the writer, to assume NNVC has been perfect in its march towards its lofty goals and/or that clear skies lie ahead.
Like all companies, NNVC has been presented with its own set of corporate, technical, business and legal issues. However, if one studies the actual progress toward demonstrating the efficacy of NNVC anti-viral therapeutics across the very wide range of viral types tested so far, it is astounding how much they have achieved for each unit dollar of investment over the last 9 years. In doing so, from a developmental company standpoint and from an industry comparative and historical perspective, NNVC has demonstrated good stewardship of funding by achieving excellent efficacy results for the total invested dollar value to date.
It is important for all investors to do their own due diligence and avoid the tendencies to follow or blindly assume accuracy and legitimacy of positive or negative commentary, including this by the writer. Also critical is to understand one’s risk level and to especially beware of misinformation. Recognize that not all misinformation is intentional, while other cases are indeed malicious and/or manipulative in nature.
The writer currently maintains a small equity position in NNVC common stock and as such could be suspected of bias. While not in the medical or pharmaceutical field, a background in science and engineering, including chemical process R&D experience, has been of immense help to the writer in recognizing true technical merit in areas investigated over the last 30+ years.
All said and considered, it is the writer’s opinion NNVC is BUY in the speculative biotech equity category.
Wishing All the Best of Good Buys!
HS
Exposed!
It kinda has that ring to it; Exposed....!
Remember the TV advertisement years ago where several guys were in an office or something and when one started saying 'doomed', the rest did in sequence?
We are all doomed!
doomed! Yep, doomed for sure.
.
.
.
.
.
Yep..
.
.
doomed!
What, really?!?
I thought IAIR was a fraud set up years ago, along with the world health organization and the CDC frauds that grew out of the frauds of all nations and all the world organizations and universities that are all frauds designed to to be ready to support the greatest fraud of all specifically developed and designed to steal the wealth and health of all human kind, NNVC. At least thats what I swear I heard somewhere on the internet, the keeper of all true and just.
As it would have it NNVC was the safe haven today. I know they have the best in class of innovative anti-viral theraputics based on an extremely wide range of extremely succsessful efficacy testing across many viral types, but today they look to be the new gold standard.
Its hard to keep true value down!
Oh OH.
9.960 reporting bad for JBII
Big red flag! BIG RED FLAG!
Good Grief what an
exposure of illegal activities concerning concerted short manipulation of NNVC stock.
Reporting such to the SEC is higly appropriate.
It is not dishonest management, it is dishonest investors, strike that, thiefs we have to contend with.
I agree with the comment. As mentioned often, dicussing NNVC with honest dialog is good for everyone. Additionally, if management does look from time to time to see what is said here and there, civilized commentary might actually make an impact. Childish commentary serves no one any good at all.
It is difficult for anyone to accept criticism, as there is a natural tendency to defend faster than experience retrospect. I have agreed before that continually being too optimistic on timetables is not particularly good. While NNVC is nothing at all like a scam, the many scam stocks that are out there rely heavily on false timetables.
I don’t think NNVC ever desired to mislead, but missing released timetables as a norm can give that impression. The most important question however, is if any of the goals were actually achieved.
Fortunately it is very easy to say and prove that many of NNVC’s goals have indeed been achieved. Not just achieve either, achieved in a very good way proven by independent researchers and shown to have extremely high efficacy. While having come later than desired, it is the final proof in the pudding that matters the most. NNVC has been quite successful in that regard.
Best of luck to all adults on the board.
HS
Is a formal report due out soon from Duke?
I forget when we were supposed to expect that to be in.
They are a very young company, I think their cell culture media sales will be steady and grow. I think their skin cream probably will also. I have heard a specialized skin cream competitor say it is a good product, one they feel is on par with the lastest technologies and of real merit. These side businesses, while distracting, also provide for a very useful teaching tool for new companies to learn how to make it happen from product manufacture to, logistics, to marketing, to final bottom line. If they can contain G&A growth, they will have learned a valuable skill in moving any other product forward. Like the rebuilding of the human body one cell at a time!
Interesting movement.
I will see if anyone on 9.960 knows anything.
Have a great day... .. .. . .
How are the 37 contracts over 10 years for 7.5 billion USD each going?
I feel anyone's pain who has some here.
George is something else, something else indeed.
Wishing all the best of good buys... .... .... .... .... ....
Via Ten-Tec RX340, we will be listening 9.960mc Antwerp in Belgium for news on NNVC and the communiqué’s that appear underway.
I just hope some big pharma does not come in the meantime and buy them for $30B.
IMO - If NNVC drops lower, you will see a surge in institutional buys.
Stand by for further news, nothing further from Corregidor… … … … …
RACOMO!
NanoViricides (NNVC) traded on the AMEX has been recognized as having probably the most versatile and effective anti-viral therapeutics currently under development in the world!
NNVC
NNVC
Do your own DD:
NNVC Reference - CRC publication Bionanotechnology II ISBN -10: 143980463X. Chapter 7.
NNVC Reference - H5N1 & Rabies at the National Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology in Hanoi, Ebola studies with the United States Army Institute of Infectious Diseases, Epidemic Kerato-Conjunctivitis EKC, anti-Herpes clinical study with THEVAC and Herpes Simplex Virus HSV with Dr. Rosenthal at NEOMED, anti-HIV therapeutics testing with the University of California in addition to KARD Scientific, Dengue Fever tests with Dr. Eva Harris at the University of California, Berkeley, et.al
NNVC Reference - European Health Organization Interest.
NNVC Reference - US FDA procedures and stage-gates. Completed pre-IND meeting. Also granted orphan drug designation as a result of excellent in-vivo efficacy with regard to Dengue fever and D hemmoragic fever under rigid protocols of Dr Harris's laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley medical research.
NNVC
NNVC
Recent coordinated attacks to lower share price is presenting long term buying and near term trading opportunities.
NNVC
NNVC
Oh god, I forgot about that! You have me cracked up!
HAve a great day!
Late night they switch to 9.960!
I think it will be at 0400 GMT, I think that is 12 EDT/9PM PDT.
This afternoon's discussion on JBI Inc will be replayed.
I only caught the 1st half. I am dying to hear what happened after it started to get a litle more heated.
Hope its not a red flag.
Sounds like a heavenly threesome to me.
Go NNVC!
It Works!
It Works!
This is gonna be great!
Go NNVC!
Remember, it is highly important to create as many problems in the minds of investors as possible, regardless of the merit of each. That is what happens when you have something of value like that of NNVC. Value attracts all sorts. I still think in 24 months I will be glad I hung onto my shares, even if I could have traded in the meantime for more 'dynamically obtained' gains.
Have a great day out their in KH7 land!
HS
NNVC will rebound. It is a good company with very measurable results over its lifetime so far. All done so at a reasonable cost opposite the norms in the industry.
12 of the 13 links shown demonstrate that, the 10th link explains the only nuisance.
Best regards
HS
I agree, but what is the authorized and outstanding share count these days. I get some strange results when looking for the correct answer.
What the heck is going on.
Another 200K shares traded at what 0.0001 or 0.0002, or what?
Is this about to RM or is this houses clearing somehow or what?
Oh well, I assume no one really has a good answer. If you do, please advise. Othewise I will just watch the show I guess!
HS
I wish I could stream the audio to you guys. Very interesting discussion on JBI, not particularly negative or positive, just interesting.
Good luck to all longs; never shorts here or there.
Bullshit, what kind of a response is that!
Not very informative.
Go JBII!
There is very interesting discussion going on about JBI right now out of Europe on 21.450.
That is one of the points I made that I assumed might be possible in some manner. But I doubt it totally runs from its own syngas. If that is what they are telling you, then I would be suspcious as you would get into an unsustainable looping situation.
I doubt crayons will make any real difference and yest things like that get replaced and/or not available due to a change in process if nothing else.
The bigger issue is the landfills. If you could actually run the thing at landfill sites, using landfill gas as a fuel source, not that is a symbiotic type of thing to do if at all possible.
In waste processing, it is the uniqueness of each situation and opportunity that needs to be exploited in the best manner possible.
Wishing all longs the best of luck, Never Shorts! Here or THERE!
I agree wholeheartedly.
JBI might get it all done and working as best as anyone else might.
My initial commentary was more of case of holding up a mirror to nasty behaviours. It is really funny how science and logic can be used to defend itself one place and not the next. Bias and hypocrisy to damage for hopes of personal gain is not good here or THERE.
Good Grief back at Ya!
I apologize for replying late, but I hit my limit. I can’t quite justify the cost. Anyway, we make ourselves wealthy, by keeping our needs few!
If I read the information correctly, JBI is using a pyrolysis process. If you think the energy it took to make the plastic has anything at all to do with what can be recovered out of it you just totally misunderstand everything.
This process is based on receiving a waste plastic feedstock material. I assume that it might come in many forms. Some might be relatively narrow in their size distributions, shapes and morphologies. In order to make their process as efficient as it can be, I would bet that the degree of undesireable debris associated with it is a factor as it must be cleaned and disposed of (a cost and energy consumer). Once cleaned, I’ll bet there is an optimum size distribution.
Grinding plastics is difficult, you can shred them somewhat, but it’s a bitch, you can also freeze them to make them brittle to allow for a more typical grinding process to function. Comminution mills can be designed to perform in either direction and require energy to operate.
Personally, when attempting to understand the energy balance, I like to work with what is called the ‘specific energy’ of each individual 'unit operation'. Only then can you start to break down and unlock the hidden energy efficiencies/inefficiencies of the entire process.
In this case it would be something like; if crayon chunks are in a size distribution my processor likes, only a few kilojoules of energy per gram of crayon chunks is needed. Or BTU per ton, horsepower per pound, specific energy is energy per unit mass. But if I am handling crap that needs cleaned from input streams to landfills, then maybe I need more equipment, that besides its capital and maintenance cost, requires a much higher HP/ton for that front end process alone.
The main stage as I understand is a pyrolyisis stage. I have worked on transport reactors and gasifier designs which could be considered similar. We typically go a little hotter, but I would bet with something like polymers you want to be around 900 to 1000 degrees F, I don’t really know. I was gasifying waste coal. But, I will bet the environment is hot and void of oxygen. Any moisture is probably a contaminant also. Regardless, moisture has a btu/lb also that has to be accounted for. Heating element and reactor heat transfer is also super important. You would not believe how much more HP/ton, or BTU/lb or whatever specific energy unit you want to use it takes to supply the theoretical amount needed, to maintain a constant temperature profile. It is not too efficient of a process. What that means is it sucks down a lot of btu’s/lb to do just that stage of the process.
Then the cooling process to separate and liquefy takes energy and has its own not so great efficiencies. If there is a syngas (synthetic gas, basically a term used in a lot of processes that off-gas, some as the principle product some as a byproduct), that is often needing to be dealt with and/or used somehow. Once the process is going, I could envision a combined cycle to use the syngas to supplement the raw utility sourced gas needed to run the burners to maintain the processor temperature. That could improve energy efficiencies if gas burners are even used for the heating elements. Electric is a possibility also I would guess. Some of the syngas might even be recycled back to the reactor to maintain the reactor atmosphere to low oxygen concentrations. Oxygen in the process will really screw you up.
How long can the unit be run without a buildup problem, char, or fouling of sorts? What happens on a unit trip, how difficult to evaluate the chambers and be ready for a restart? Just a few questions I might have. I am not sure the exact details of the process conditions and chambers JBI is using.
But then comes a lot of the peripheral processes associated with obtaining, receiving, storing, reclaiming, conveying, screening , preprocessing, processing , collecting, containing and transporting final product that takes capital equipment, maintenance (material loss from attrition/corrosion, lubricants, even extending to the operators that have to drive cars to work and the gasoline that took – I know its not much, but …), plus the big one, the direct ENERGY used in the major processes, that ALL ADDS UP!
Finally, someone sums it up in its entirety, not cheating by ignoring little or BIG things here and there, and guess what, it takes X BTU/ton of product in energy alone to make a ton of the stuff and you get less than X BTU/ton out of it as its fuel heating value! Very often I have seen good experienced engineers state for X for a given process but left out a lot of the peripherals that are indeed real and important. Sometimes I see them leave out the typical unit operation efficiency.
For example, I had a senior research scientist show me his process that required a heating of 1mm by 4mm cylindrically shaped catalyst pellets. He took the heat capacity of the pellets and said he needed to heat them from ambient near 80F to about 750F. The heat capacity is in units of btu per pound per degree F. The delta F was 750-80 = 670F. The heat capacity of the catalyst pellet was 0.25 btu/lb-F. Thus, he said all he needed was about 670F(0.25 btu/lb-F)=167.5 btu/lb of material processed. He wanted to process 10000 per hour. Thus, he concluded his POWER requirement was 10000 lb/hr (167.5 btu/lb) = 1,675,000 btu/hr. He got an entire company to spend about a 2 million dollars on evaluating his process based on a presetation that hinged on the economics working at that energy utilization. It was a super shock to them when I told them that for the particular thing they were trying to do, the most likely best and most efficient processor was a fluidized bed heat exchanger. That it actually got some of the best competitive energy efficiencies, but it was only about 30% efficient. Its not like a motor in a perfect setting that might get 90%. i.e. - he really needed about 5.6 million Btu/hr heat source! Even though the reason for doing it was noble, this shot it right out of the water. He was dumbfounded. He hired a team to prove me wrong.
They came back about a week later with the bad news.
That is just a fraction of what I am taking about.
So, I am just curious, not trying to be positive or negative.
I am just trying to properly evaluate your process. Does anyone have that number? Does anyone even care?
I think you should. Even if it is a net-negative energy process, there are likely still reasons for doing it. it just changes the economics and the uses.
It might mean it is not a good idea at all to help save the world’s energy supplies. If net-negative, it actually wastes the earths resources. That ultimate loss would then, eventually in the end, be radiated into space. In the grand scheme, you would not want to PAY for fuel LOSS.
Maybe it helps mitigate atmospheric CO2 somehow?
That might be something you would pay for. I would need to look closer there. Atmospheric CO2, its effects, contributors, pluses and minuses are extremely distorted, in many cases by no deliberate intent. You really have to look at the whole picture in a wide context to make the best most optimum decisions in that area. A very narrow small example is methane that escapes from landfills (or cow farts believe it or not). It is far better to burn that and make CO2 and dump it into the atmosphere, plus you get energy out of it, than to let it escape. Why? Because one kilogram mole of methane has about 20-40 times the greenhouse gas effect as one kilogram mole of CO2. There is debate where it lies in that range, but no debate it is worse.
Maybe it just gives use more years to a landfill. That’s worth a lot.
Maybe it gives you a little of each and more, well that’s good too.
I don’t know. But I am curious about the energy balance of the process.
I see so many people making so many misguided decisions based on a misunderstanding of the true energy balance of many things, from individual company product designs to international geopolitical decisions on energy.
In ALL my investments, I try to keep an open mind and see as clearly as I can with the least of shaded glasses, while also recognizing those non-ideal aspects that plague every venture and company’s history, present and path forward. Knowing also that risks abound regardless of how firm something seems to be.
Have a great day
Wishing all longs the best of luck; never shorts, here or THERE.
HS
Interesting set of links.
Scanning through them, I thought I found one that would give some process performance parameters, but did not find any yet. Maybe you can help point me to such information.
I am particularly interested in what is called the 'Exergy' of the process. But anything that provides a good indication of the raw input BTU is needed to produce a unit of material, as compared to the final product heating value in btu per unit, would be of interest.
For example only, there was a time, and still is for most processes, that to produce 1 liter of ethanol, it takes more energy than you get out of a liter of ethanol. Byt the time you get the seed, cultivate, plant, cost and power and water use for irrigation, harvesting, collection, transport, pre-process, process, ferment, heat, boil, distill, cool, collect and contain, the total energy used to do all that is why it is more than you ever hope to get out of it by burning it. Newer processes utlizing special feedstock has improved on that, but not by a tremendous amount. The result, is that as an alternate energy source, ethanol, while touted by many, is really a stupid thing to produce. If you want a farm program, or simply need to convert the energy from one form to another for a particular type of storage or use, well then there can be some merit. But from an energy supply standpoint it is a lousy and often a net-negative energy supply.
I would suspect P2O has some similar issues, but somewhat less complicated by the extent of the peripheral processes involved.
Suffice to say, I am not poo pooing it. Just wondering if the majority of the benefit is to simply transform the waste and not landfill it rather than being a good source of TRUE alternative energy. If so, that still does not make it bad, it just needs to be understood so its use is not misapplied and to avoid any net-negative energy scenarios or anything close to them.
Any honest input would be appreciated.
HS