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.
More about Ridgeback...I posted months ago...
Totally False Assumptions...that Russia trial..." deadline was moved back by 6 months" or that " it means there have been problems ALREADY getting things up and running in Russia"...no evidence of that.
September is NOT THE DEADLINE...it represents the end of a "Window"
IMO IPIX is likely at the end of Clinical Trials in Russia, based upon 20 sites and 4-6 participants at each site.
In fact, it appears from the public regulatory filings accessable to the public...that RUSSIAN Trails will finish first... and could spur on Russian approval before U.S, and with it, the possibility of Russian Pharma stepping up into the shoes of U.S BP. IMO, the separate regulartory approval in Russian was to have dual approvals...and dual paths to monitize Brilacidin...
Also the 21 day mark for Clinicaltrials.gov filing of the commencement of U.S Trials IMO should be forthcoming ... any day now (and likely overdue...but don't see any reprecussions for dragging out the filing and keeping it under wraps). Once filed, we will see how granular or stealth Leo will be. IMO Leo will continue give little opportunity for short/funds to spoil the party...and likely drop "D'Bomb" on them.
It will all be about the strength of the trial results...IMO many are watching!
Totally BOGUS STATEMENT: "Russian trial deadline pushed out to Sept."
My Primary Care Physican in NY is Russian born and educated. He graduated from Med School in Soviet Union (Bashkir State Medical University Graduated in 1984). He inspected the filings/site commented and confirmed that September is the outside date, and is not when the trial will end. It is the "sponsors" outside date, in original application which gives an estimate (and gives itself a great lattitude of time) ...block out a period of time in which they would like to conduct active trials...but usually never used.
...that is an outside date (and an extension could be filed as a matter of course) He also indicated another trial for IPIX is "open" with a tentative outside date of 2026...a large block of time for another indication...(didn't ask what it was)
Reference to "SEPTEMBER" DOES NOT REFLECT THE EXPECTATION of the COMPLETION of the ACTUAL TRIAL. Its the outer-timeframe...and it could end soon..."IT COULD BE A MATTER OF DAYS or WEEKS, depending upon how brisk the recruitment at the particular sites is"...Further commenting"..."but with 20 sites, it should be rather quick"
Also "with good results"...they could get approved in Russia and a Pharma company there could market it whereever they receive a license from the company to do so.
It looks like IPIX is quite active in Russia... (maybe even approval BEFORE the U.S?) HUMM!
Herd Immunity...a fiction!
ONLY a Therapeutic (like Brilacidin) which KILLS the virus (likely on contact) will eradicate most of Coronavirus AND its Varients, as the mutations develope
Real scientist warn:
As long as the virus continues to mutate somewhere in the world, ... this coronavirus will be with us indefinitely, much like the flu is. And the FLUE...KILLS 40,000 A YEAR AND FAR LESS DEADLY!
Read on...
"Roadblock no. 1 to herd immunity: COVID-19 variants
First of all, let's talk about the variants.
"Viruses mutate constantly, so most mutations do nothing," said Wachter. "What we're seeing now with the U.K., the Brazilian and the South African variant is interesting, because it shows that variants can change in all sorts of ways. They can make (viruses) more infectious, they can make them more serious -- meaning equally infectious, but if you happen to get it you're likely to get sicker -- and/or they can make them resistant to immunity."
Any or all of those things are concerning because they make herd immunity harder to attain. Take the U.K. variant, which is said to be about 50% more infectious than last year's predominant strain. That means you'd need to vaccinate more people to really curb its spread. Variants that are resistant to immunity would provide an even bigger challenge and force a real re-tinkering of the vaccine.
As long as the virus keeps circulating, it will continue to have a chance to mutate. That's one of the major reasons there's been such a big emphasis on getting the vaccine into people's arms as quickly as possible. Not only does it keep people from getting sick, it keeps the virus from creating more -- potentially more contagious or serious -- mutations.
Roadblock no. 2: California isn't an island
Gov. Gavin Newsom recently announced an ambitious goal of vaccinating 4 million Californians per week. That hasn't happened yet -- not even close -- but that would hypothetically speed us toward herd immunity in no time.
But California isn't an island. Nor is the United States, for that matter. And this is where things get really complicated.
If you think the vaccine rollout is going slowly in the United States, it's going worse in almost every other country. If people around the world are still getting sick, they will continue to circulate the virus on airplanes or cruise ships, much like they did in the beginning of this pandemic.
Plus, as long as the virus is in circulation, there are more opportunities for it to mutate.
"I don't actually think we're going to eradicate this virus anytime soon," said Gandhi. Total eradication has happened before with smallpox, she points out, but the virus was substantially different from this one.
"The answer is several years, to many years, to never," said Wachter. "We never reached herd immunity with the flu. What we have (with the flu) is a virus that mutates every year and we've got to rejigger our vaccines every year. Luckily, it's not that infectious and not that deadly. But 30,000 or 40,000 people a year die of the flu in the United States."
As long as the virus continues to mutate somewhere in the world, Wachter thinks this coronavirus will be with us indefinitely, much like the flu is.
"It's seasonal, it comes in the winter, there's a new version with variants, and so we've got to rejigger vaccines every year or two," he said. "That probably is more likely than the scenario of two years from now, we never ever see this thing again."
That's why the doctors aren't exactly framing herd immunity as some grand finish line."
IPIX (LEO) ... never posts?... predictably fails?...IMO don't believe so
Keeps shorts off guard!
What day will he post...IMO...WHEN YOU LEAST EXPECT IT!
FRIDAY...
January 29, 2021
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL OF BRILACIDIN FOR TREATING COVID-19 SCHEDULED TO BEGIN NEXT WEEK
THURSDAY...
January 14, 2021
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN FOR THE TREATMENT OF COVID-19 RECEIVES FDA FAST TRACK DESIGNATION
MONDAY...
December 21, 2020
FDA GRANTS IND APPROVAL FOR PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL OF INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN FOR TREATING COVID-19
WEDNESDAY
November 30, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS COVID-19 CLINICAL TRIAL TO SUPPORT ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF BRILACIDIN AS A “PAN-CORONAVIRUS” THERAPEUTIC
WEDNESDAY
November 16, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS ANNOUNCES OVERSEAS REGULATORY FILING SUBMITTED FOR COVID-19 CLINICAL STUDY
THURSDAY
November 2, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS RECEIVES PRE-IND RESPONSE FROM FDA ON COVID-19 TRIAL
FRIDAY
October 30, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS AND GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY ANNOUNCE PUBLIC RELEASE OF LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS DEMONSTRATING BRILACIDIN’S COVID-19 TREATMENT POTENTIAL
FRIDAY
October 2, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS ANNOUNCES PRE-IND MEETING REQUEST GRANTED BY FDA FOR THE STUDY OF BRILACIDIN FOR THE TREATMENT OF COVID-19
TUESDAY
September 15, 2020
LABORATORY TESTING OF BRILACIDIN FOR COVID-19 IN COMBINATION WITH REMDESIVIR REDUCES VIRAL LOAD BY NEARLY 100 PERCENT
TUESDAY
September 8, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS ANNOUNCES PUBLICATION OF INDEPENDENT RESEARCH ON KEVETRIN, THE COMPANY’S P53 DRUG CANDIDATE, IN ONCOLOGY REPORTS
WEDNESDAY
August 26, 2020
DR. WILLIAM F. DEGRADO, A DISCOVERER OF BRILACIDIN, JOINS INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS AS SCIENTIFIC ADVISOR
MONDAY
August 24, 2020
COVID-19 DRUG CANDIDATE BRILACIDIN ACHIEVES A SELECTIVITY INDEX AMONG THE HIGHEST REPORTED, EXHIBITING POTENT ANTI-SARS-COV-2 ACTIVITY AT LOW CONCENTRATIONS; CLINICAL TRIAL FORTHCOMING
TUESDAY
August 4, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS AND U.S. REGIONAL BIOCONTAINMENT LABORATORY NEARING COMPLETION OF BRILACIDIN ANTI-SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) IN VITRO TESTING
TUESDAY
July 22, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS GRANTS LICENSING RIGHTS TO FOX CHASE CHEMICAL DIVERSITY CENTER, INC. FOR ANTIFUNGAL TECHNOLOGY
MONDAY
July 20, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN INHIBITS NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) BY ALMOST 90% AT THE LOWEST CONCENTRATION TESTED TO DATE IN A HUMAN LUNG CELL LINE
MONDAY
July 13, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS – CLINICAL TRIAL TESTING OF BRILACIDIN AGAINST SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) TARGETED TO COMMENCE Q4 2020
TUESDAY
July 7, 2020
IN VITRO TESTING OF INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN FOR COVID-19 SHOWS CONSISTENT ANTI-SARS-COV-2 EFFICACY; MANUFACTURING PREPARATION UNDERWAY FOR COVID-19 CLINICAL TRIAL
WEDNESDAY
June 17, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN INHIBITS SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) BY 97 PERCENT IN A HUMAN LUNG CELL LINE
TUESDAY
June 11, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS COLLABORATING WITH REGIONAL BIOCONTAINMENT LAB ON GRANT APPLICATION TO RESEARCH BRILACIDIN AS A PAN-CORONAVIRUS THERAPEUTIC
May 26, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS RECEIVES DATA FROM PUBLIC HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE SHOWING BRILACIDIN INHIBITS SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) IN A HUMAN CELL LINE
May 19, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN REDUCES VIRAL TITER OF SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) BY 75 PERCENT AFTER ONLY 1 HOUR OF PREINCUBATION IN IN VITRO STUDY AT BSL-3 FACILITY
May 5, 2020
INHIBITORY EFFECT OF INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN ON SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) IN PRIMARY HUMAN IMMUNE CELLS TO BE STUDIED AT LEADING PUBLIC HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE
April 27, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS INFORMED NEXT PHASE OF BRILACIDIN CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) TESTING TO BEGIN WEEK OF MAY 4
April 20, 2020
SCREENING OF 11,552 COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIES INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS’ BRILACIDIN AS ONE OF THE MOST PROMISING POTENTIAL INHIBITORS OF THE NOVEL CORONAVIRUS
April 6, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS IN DISCUSSIONS TO ADVANCE BRILACIDIN INTO HUMAN TRIALS AGAINST COVID-19
April 1, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS RECEIVES DATA SUPPORTING BRILACIDIN’S DIRECT INHIBITION OF SARS-COV-2, THE NOVEL CORONAVIRUS RESPONSIBLE FOR COVID-19
March 17, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS BRILACIDIN TO BE RESEARCHED AS POSSIBLE NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) VACCINE; BRILACIDIN NOW BEING TESTED AS DRUG AND VACCINE AT DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONS
March 12, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS ANNOUNCES TESTING PROCEDURES OF BRILACIDIN AGAINST CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19)
March 10, 2020
U.S. REGIONAL BIOCONTAINMENT LAB TO BEGIN TESTING OF BRILACIDIN AGAINST CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) NEXT WEEK
March 9, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS BRILACIDIN RECEIVED BY U.S. REGIONAL BIOCONTAINMENT LABORATORY; TESTING AGAINST CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19)
March 6, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS SIGNS SECOND MTA TO EXPLORE BRILACIDIN AS CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 TREATMENT
March 5, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS PLANS FOR PHASE 2 TRIAL OF NEW TREATMENT FOR ULCERATIVE COLITIS
March 2, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS PROVIDES SCIENTIFIC RATIONALE AND CLINICAL DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVES FOR BRILACIDIN AS A POTENTIAL NOVEL CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 TREATMENT
February 27, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS TO SHIP BRILACIDIN TO U.S. REGIONAL BIOCONTAINMENT LABORATORY FOR RESEARCH AGAINST CORONAVIRUS COVID-19
February 24, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS SUBMITS MATERIAL TRANSFER AGREEMENT TO STUDY LEAD DEFENSIN MIMETIC BRILACIDIN FOR CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19)
February 18, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS EXPLORING LEAD DEFENSIN MIMETIC DRUG CANDIDATE BRILACIDIN AS POTENTIAL NOVEL CORONAVIRUS TREATMENT
February 13, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS PHASE 1 TRIAL OF BRILACIDIN FOR ULCERATIVE COLITIS MEETS PRIMARY ENDPOINTS; POSITIVE TOPLINE RESULTS OF ORAL BRILACIDIN
January 29, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS FURTHER ENGAGES LOCUST WALK TO LEAD OUT-LICENSING NEGOTIATIONS FOR RIGHTS TO PHASE 3-READY ORAL MUCOSITIS DRUG CANDIDATE
January 24, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS COMPLETES DOSING IN PHASE 1 TRIAL FOR NEW ORAL ULCERATIVE COLITIS DRUG
January 17, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS ANNOUNCES DOSE ESCALATION
January 16, 2020
INNOVATION PHARMACEUTICALS ANNOUNCES DOSING OF FIRST COHORT IN PHASE 1 TRIAL OF ORAL BRILACIDIN IN ULCERATIVE COLITIS PROGRAM; TOPLINE RESULTS ANTICIPATED EARLY Q1 2020
rejoice...dont complain
raising capital (vs debt financing) = path to trials and success
ps NICE FIND ...GEORGE
Brilacidin Demonstrates Inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 in Cell Culture
https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/2/271 link shows number of times Peer Review Article was accessed as of Feb 9th and recited in other publications.
The abstract has been viewed over 2500 times and full artilce 500 times...Brilacidin getting known better in the scientific community.
________________________________________________________________________
You stated:
your post states:
Is this only a little "inconveniences" of what is reported to be Climate Changes side issues?...or should we say "Global Warming" (or "Global Freezing") Strikes again?
Wait until New Green Deal kicks in and we have to rely on SOLAR covered in snow...for weeks.
California has constant "black-outs" with green energy...WOW...really bright people "Globalist/New Environmentalists. Laughable...U.S. Carbon down to lowest levels of developed nations...and China and India can pollute with dirty coal and oil as much as they want since they are considered "developing nations" and have no restrictions...
How much of this farce are the American People going to stand for? When will Americans turn around and revolt with "we are not going to take this (shit) anymore!"...
The Socialist/Marxist/Democrats better put their NIKES on and start running for China...that is the only country that will take them. Attempts at GUN will be the last stand. They will not take them without personally receiving its contents.
PS. Is it still woke to use the term "Blackout" or should it be "Inconvenience Absence of Light"?
Lets be clear...the truth of this statement...HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED OR PROVEN ANYTHING.
Until and unless OG speaks with ALL involved in the series of RBL Tests, which were ultimately the subject of the Peer Reveiw Artilce...he is makeing huge presumptions...and therefore blowing hot air.
...
As "YOU" WELL KNOW ..Warren Kyle Weston... does not have a medical/scientific background to influence Dr.Narayanan or any serious scientist in an RBL. Non-substantive scientific participation...still get one listed as a "contributor"...
To believe your and OG's "assumptions" and "unsubstantiated conclusions" ... would require one to assume Dr. Aarthi Narayanan, an expert on Remdesivir, was relegated to a cleaning lady in the lab.
Just the opposite likely occurred...Jane and W. Klye Weston contributed by providing prior research or data, etc...menial tasks FROM AFAR...not directing or even influencing the tests and methodology...
IMO Dr. Aarthi Narayanan has a great interest in protecting her reputation from delusional allegations.
DNMR is more than the REAL DEAL...it is the ONLY DEAL for going back to PLASTIC CONTAINERS, BAGS, STRAWS and BOTTLES which are 100% biodegradable and biofriendlyin salt water...the oil produced from the by product of vegetable oil is 100% bio-friendly...and no trees have to be cut and processed.
...our idiot Resident Joey Biden will likely also announce DNMR products as edible...and eligible for a subsidy...
all joking aside...imo Look for major announcements by food manufacturers about adoption ... a $100 SP after earnings..
FatAlbert...you are right on all your commentary!
While there are a few posters here who deny the "high probablitiy" of Brilacidin's success against Covid-19 BASE ON THE SCIENCE WE KNOW RIGHT NOW...
...and while many have been satisfied with Scalping the fractions of a penny on flipping (wash, rinse and repeat) and keeping the price at bay ...
IMO those flippers continue to not recognize the tremendous opportunities which are ahead of Brilacidin/IPIX shareholders...
I have been a proponant of not scapling...and "investing" in the tremendous success which IMO is going to achieved via Brilacidin.
TO NEWBIES...read the company's PR's in detail and read poster FARRELL... the science is enormous and proving out via Gov. sanctioned independent research test results...FDA Investigational New Drug approval PLUS Fast Tract Designation...
I am QUITE CONTENT IN MY ACCUMULATING OVER $100,000 IN DAILY GAINS for every .03 rise in SP....and look forward to when they are $1,000,000 daily gains...which I expect to occur within 30 days and increasing from there.
to the $200 a day flippers...it was interesting...good luck!
"Know what you own!"...and imo EMBRACE IT!
FatAlbert...your time has arrived!
TIME for "REDDIT (using theme of) ROBINHOOD... TO STRIKE BACK!"...for IPIX
Time to fulfill the Reddit/Robinhood quest..."Rob from the Rich (criminal hedge funds) and Give to the Poor (financially struggling, but promising small Bio-techs)
CRIMINAL HEDGE FUNDS/RESEARCH, NAKED SHORTS AND UNETHICAL LAW FIRMS GANG UP TO DESTROY EMERGING "Life Saving" BIO-TECHS!
The opportunity is here and READY FOR REDDIT/ROBINHOOD'S EXECUTION...
As you know...IPIX is about to commence, THIS WEEK, Human Trials to determine the efficacy of Brilacidin as a dynamic Therapeutic to destroy Covid-19 on contact, as well as acting as an anti-inflammatory, antiviral and antibacterial.
Brilacidin was acquired in 2013, from Polymedix by IPIX (f/k/a CTIX) from the Univ. of Penn, having been co-developed by world renowned scientist, Dr. Wm DeGrado . http://www.ipharminc.com/press-release/2016/11/16/cellceutix-completes-acquistion-of-polymedix-assets
The prospects of and belief that Brilacidin will be the "holy grail" for finally destroying Covid-19 is supported by years of research and development by Dr. DeGrado AND results by two independent U.S. Regional Biocontainment Laboratories (Rutgers Univ. and George Mason Univ), demonstrating a Covid-19 Load Reduction on Human Tissue of up to 97%.
In recognizing the prospects and promise of Brilacidin...the FDA last month not only gave IPIX "INVESTIGATIONAL NEW DRUG" approval, authorizing Human Clinical Trials, but granted "FAST TRACK DESIGNATION"!
But this would not have happened...if GREEDY, SLIMY HEDGE FUNDS and their minions Rosen Law Firm, Bleecker Street Research and Mako had been successful with their false Libelous Publications, coordinated NAKED SHORTING worked...but they LOST in their failed law suit...the CRIMINALS were TOTALLY DISCREDITED.
Lucky for humanity...Leo found a way for IPIX to crawl out of the ashes...and Survive to bring its SCIENCE (Brilacidin) to the forefront ... NOW REDDIT/ROBINHOOD can bring it back to its former self...
..Its time for "pay-back" to Bleeker Research (Mako) and its criminal Hedge Funds for LIBELING IPIX in SA, then NAKED SHORTING AND SHORTING... IPIX from $4.96 to where we are today... (.31).
In spite of the effort to run IPIX to zero... IPIX (Leo) found a way to continue to develop several promising LIFE SAVING DRUGS
...imo...these Criminals are still active here...there is NO PROOF that they ever COVERED their Hundreds of Millions of Share...short position.
AS NOTED...THEY ARE EVIL and Criminal... more interested in their own criminal Greed.
They are content to Destroy promising Small Biotechs companies for THEIR GREED...and to prevent these companies from surviving and bringing new "life-saving" drugs to market.
If Bleecker Street Research, Rosen Law Firm and MAKO had their way...BRILACIDIN (with 5 promising active indications) and KEVETRIN (cancer)...IPIX would have been long gone and the hope for NOT ONLY COVID-19 DESTROYER, but all the other promising therapeutic indications would never have reached the light of day!
TIME for "(REDDIT)ROBINHOOD...TO STRIKE BACK"...against the DARK SIDE (Criminal Hedge Funds)
READ below how the Criminals Got Caught...but were never punished...
IT'S TIME FOR THEIR PUNISHMENT!
Below: THE TRUTH OF HOW CRIMINAL HEDGE FUNDS/RESEARCH, NAKED SHORTS AND UNETHICAL LAW FIRMS GANG UP TO DESTROY EMERGING "Life Saving" BIO-TECHS!
https://seekingalpha.com/article/3919626-truth-emerges-court-documents-discredit-article-disparaging-cellceutix
The Truth Emerges: Court Documents Discredit Article Disparaging Cellceutix
Feb. 23, 2016 9:21 AM ETInnovation Pharmaceuticals Inc. (IPIX)49 Comments
Summary
Anonymous CTIX short seller Mako Research contributed a scathing article on August 6, claiming CTIX was a scam company with unviable science run out of empty offices.
Mako's article becomes the basis of a class action lawsuit with only one plaintiff, one that has history with the lead counsel in another securities lawsuit.
Court documents show the complaint has been amended, removing the points from Mako's sensationalized headline, discrediting the author's opinion.
Cellceutix has filed a motion to dismiss the case; Mako has "gone dark."
Upside for CTIX is 127% to get back to the price when Mako's article was published.
On the morning of August 6, 2015, an article was published on Seeking Alpha by an anonymous author using the pseudonym Mako Research, taking a hatchet to Cellceutix Corp. (OTC: CTIX). Mako disclosed having a short position in CTIX, meaning a bet was been placed that the stock price would go down. The article, alleged by Cellceutix to be a hit piece integral to orchestrated, illegal stock manipulations directed at small companies, came with a sensationalized headline ("Cellceutix: Empty Office, Unviable 'Science', Misleading Disclosures, 96% Downside") and equally brash statements in the article body asserting that Cellceutix's pipeline of drugs in clinical trials are ineffective and the company is essentially without worth.
Over the next six weeks, Mako published five other articles, including using similar phrases to the CTIX piece ("empty office," "price target $0.00," etc.) in two articles thrashing Ocata Therapeutics (NASDAQ:OCAT), a company that Astellas Pharma (OTCPK:ALPMF) agreed on November 10, 2015 to buy for $379 million in cash. Mako has "gone dark" since the last Ocata piece on September 23, 2015. There have been no more published articles and social media pages have disappeared.
According to its website and SEC filings, Cellceutix is a clinical stage biotech developing drugs for several indications, including an antibiotic (Brilacidin) for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) planned to enter Phase 3 studies, an anti-cancer drug (Kevetrin) planned to enter a Phase 2 trial for ovarian cancer, an oral non-biologic drug (Prurisol) for psoriasis that is wrapping up a Phase 2 trial, and an anti-inflammatory oral rinse (Brilacidin-OM) for oral mucositis that is currently in a Phase 2 study. Cellceutix has received for its ABSSSI drug a Qualified Infectious Disease Product (QIDP) designation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Brilacidin-OM, an oral rinse formulation of Brilacidin, is being developed under a Fast Track designation from the FDA. Its anti-cancer drug has recently completed a Phase 1 trial at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute as a novel treatment for advanced solid tumors. Kevetrin has multiple FDA designations, including Orphan Drug for ovarian cancer and retinoblastoma and Pediatric Rare Disease for retinoblastoma. Its psoriasis drug is in a Phase 2 trial for mild-to-moderate plaque psoriasis and should have top-line data in May 2016.
The Lawsuit Emerges - Shoot First Ask Questions Later
The Mako article "screaming fire" led to a sharp drop in CTIX's share value. Immediately a securities law firm announced an "investigation" into Cellceutix, simultaneously trolling for a lead plaintiff for a class action lawsuit while lending credence to the Mako article, which further propelled the stock lower. In the wake of the storm, NYC-based Rosen Law Firm, a firm with an extensive history of filing press releases on class action cases, was the first to issue such a release. According to public information, Rosen issued its news of investigation on August 6, 2015 at 12:41 PM ET (about 2 hours after the Mako article was published) and had a lead plaintiff (Nicole O'Connell) signed by the end of the day. O'Connell shortly thereafter dropped out of the case and was replaced by Gary Zagami, the lead plaintiff in a previous Rosen lawsuit. Zagami remains the only plaintiff in the class action against Cellceutix. Zagami signed on August 7, 2016 under penalty of perjury that he had read and agreed to the complaint.
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, in particular Rule 11, was put in place to prevent abusive litigation, tasking law firms with performing proper due diligence before initiating a case and mandating sanctions if appropriate procedure is not followed. To wit, the onus fell on Rosen to ensure that the case was not frivolous. On the surface, this still did not seem to transpire. The minimal time frame from the 12,600-word Mako article to a signed lead plaintiff certainly begs the question of how much due diligence was undertaken. For the average reader (250 words per minute), it takes nearly an hour to even read the article, much less properly vet the assertions and write a 6,000-word complaint for a potential lead plaintiff to read and approve. A look at the original complaint, filed on September 11, 2015, shows it was basically a copy and paste of the Mako article.
Why was there a delay of more than a month in filing the case after so expeditiously drafting the complaint for a lead plaintiff to sign? According to court documents, Rosen attorney Phillip Kim explained that "there was a delay between when we issued the announcement and when we actually filed the case. When we filed the case, Ms. O'Connell had reviewed the complaint and had approved it, same as Mr. Zagami when we amended the complaint. We didn't file the complaint right way. We wanted to check it out. That's part of our obligation." (emphasis added.)
Notice in the original complaint filed by Rosen that the crux of the complaint was, "Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Brilacidin is not effective; (2) Kevetrin does not activate the p-53 gene, which is a tumor suppressor; and (3) Defendant Menon did not earn his PhD in Pharmacology from Harvard University." The class period is listed by Rosen from May 10, 2013 to August 6, 2015.
In a section of the complaint titled, "The Truth Emerges," assertions were made regarding Mako's allegations that Cellceutix is "run out of what appears to be an empty office building" and "nothing more than a shell corporation." Further, Cellceutix's science is "demonstrably unviable," management is involved with "Ponzi scheme fraudsters" and the company is "dangerous" and "should be avoided" as its "fair value is 96-99% lower than the current price." Further into the harangue, Mako is quoted in bold as saying, "Brilacidin is simply not effective;" that "Brilacidin is not effective in combating and treating: (1) ABSSSI;" that Kevetrin "does not stop cancer stem cells;" that the Phase 1 clinical trial design of Kevetrin is "ineffective;" and that Kevetrin "does not activate" the tumor suppressor gene p53.
It's presumable that Rosen deemed all of the allegations and statements were factual and important in the case, as aforementioned, Rosen "wanted to check it out" before filing the original complaint with the court.
Mako's Charges Get Walked Back
Rosen has since filed two amended complaints, in some cases modifying the allegations, omitting sections in others and even posing some new allegations, but ultimately still relying upon the Mako article as the cornerstone of the complaint.
In the second amended complaint, filed on January 11, 2016, which attempts to widen that class period by more than a month to between May 10, 2013 and September 11, 2015, many of the brash statements no longer exist. While there are similarities in some of the allegations, the core of the complaint shifted to more blunted allegations of misrepresentations with respect to Brilacidin for treating Gram-negative bacteria, Brilacidin as an "antibiotic" for oral mucositis, the structure of the Kevetrin clinical trial, costs associated with seeking FDA approval of Brilacidin for ABSSSI, Phase 3 trial experience and irresponsible actions by Dr. Menon and Cellceutix CEO Leo Ehrlich.
The Mako report is referenced for the purpose of arguing that:
"1) Brilacidin was ineffective against gram-negative bacteria, and was ineffective as an antibiotic oral rinse; 2) that Kevetrin's Phase 1 trial did not establish Brilacidin's efficacy, contrary to Defendants' misrepresentations; 3) that Menon lied about receiving a PhD from Harvard; 4) that Menon was not the inventor of the blockbuster drugs as he had claimed."
Point number two is presumably a typographical error and intended to state, "Kevetrin's Phase 1 trial did not establish Kevetrin's efficacy…"
There are no longer statements that Cellceutix is a shell and run out of an empty office building. Gone are the direct statements about the broad ineffectiveness of Brilacidin and that Brilacidin doesn't work against ABSSSI. Vanished have allegations that Kevetrin doesn't activate p53 or impact cancer stem cells. There is no longer commentary about Ponzi scheme fraudsters or about the company being essentially worthless.
So, what has happened is that all of the topics in Mako's eye-catching headline that started the whole fiasco have been removed.
It seems reasonable to deduce that these assertions of Mako simply weren't true. Certainly a law firm specializing in securities class actions that has been researching the Cellceutix case for at least five months would not have omitted such damning statements if they could be supported by scientific and fundamental evidence.
As for the rest pertaining to the second amended complaint, Rosen is still trying to present cloudy allegations, presumably in a bid to survive a motion to dismiss. Some of the allegations are perplexing, to say the least, as, even after months of investigation and supposed consultation with experts, Rosen still confuses Brilacidin (an intravenous antibiotic for ABSSSI) with Brilacidin-OM (an oral rinse anti-inflammatory treatment for oral mucositis) and doesn't appear to understand disease/condition pathogenesis, scientific terms or clinical trial protocol, amongst other things.
Rather than dissect these matters, interested parties can learn more via the dismantling of the case by Cellceutix lead counsel Mike Sullivan in support of a motion to dismiss the complaint. A fascinating read. As Sullivan states in the court document, it is "unsurprising that Plaintiff [Zagami/Rosen] profoundly misunderstands Defendants' [Cellceutix] leading drugs in clinical trials, the underlying biological properties of those drugs, and the operation of the clinical trials themselves."
Sullivan adds:
"Defendants will not and need not engage in a back and forth with Plaintiff about the efficacy of its drugs or the parameters of its clinical trials. As courts have long recognized, that is up to research scientists and the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA"), with any future safety and efficacy determination based upon, among other things, the results of multiple clinical trials. Nor will Defendants address each instance of unsubstantiated "smoke" Plaintiff attempts to create by alleging a history of bad acts by Company officers. No matter how hard Plaintiff's counsel may try to dress up the third complaint filed in this matter, there is no "fire," and the SAC falls woefully short of stating any actionable securities fraud claims against Defendants."
No matter how cleverly the Mako article was written to make it look like it was an expert opinion, the facts now show it was misleading. The court documents plainly demonstrate this.
Mako did a number on the share price of CTIX and the stock hasn't recovered… yet. First, it seems most plausible that the lawsuit will get dismissed with prejudice, which will relieve pressure on the stock. Second, at $1.08, Cellceutix commands a market capitalization of less than $130 million, arguably an extremely low valuation for a company with such a diversified pipeline of drugs in clinical development. Wall Street will not continue to look past Cellceutix and its novel drugs at these discount prices. The current price puts CTIX down more than 70% from its 52-week high in July in spite of the company's pipeline growing stronger and stronger, including the latest p21 data showing Kevetrin is activating p53 to fight cancer. Shares are down by 56% from the day the Mako piece was released, equating to a 127% upside from $1.08 to resume trading at a pre-article level.
Historically, stocks that are victimized by someone yelling "fire" when none exists turn out to be a great investment decision as the stock makes a strong comeback. This seems the most likely future for CTIX's stock, followed by an uplist, more clinical data and even more upside, should the trials continue to impress as they have so far.
Editor's Note: This article discusses one or more securities that do not trade on a major U.S. exchange. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.
Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Loanranger
Perhaps Petermax realized the statement you attribute to him (which, by the way, was not stated in the post "petemantx post# 342521" to which you responded) was wrong after reading my previous post?:
Likely Petermax read my post and changed his position, but perhaps you did not have the opportunity to read it...so here it is again:
Olden Grumpini
you stated:
Very true Dr. P.
kfcyahoo...
Base on your posting:
Sunspotter... you state Naked Shorting ... DOES NOT EXIST...outside of Conspiracy Therorist!~
Lucky you posted:
Olden Grumpini
Actually...Brilacidin IV administration for total ABSSSI Human Trials...was not over 400, but WAS OVER 267...Add 77 to your 267 for a total of 344 treated IV with Brilacidin. You did not add the Phase 1 PolyMedix conducted.
Based upon 344 patients being administered IV Brilacidin, in Human Trials ... the ABSSSI human trials...
The delivery of BRILACIDIN IV has been demonstrated and established as SAFE and was SYSTEMICALLY EFFICACIOUS for the ABSSSI indication
...add to this SAFE and SYSTEMIC DELIVERY....the RBL's tests results 97% CV-19 viral reduction results.. it is not unreasonable to predict the PROBABILITY of a systemic delivery of Brilacidin for Covid-19 infected Patient could significantly reduce viral load, more than any other proposed therapeutic or current one.
________________________________________________________________________
Polymedix pr that says a total of 77 subjects were treated in their ph I trial.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20100928005299/en/PolyMedix-Initiates-Phase-2-Clinical-Trial-Antibiotic
Quote:
PolyMedix has completed two Phase 1 clinical trials in which a combined total of 77 healthy subjects received PMX-30063. In those clinical trials, PMX-30063 was safely administered in single or multiple doses without serious adverse effects. The only drug-related reactions of clinical importance to date have been paresthesias (abnormal sensations of numbness and tingling), which were mild, transient, non-disabling, and resolved on their own.
Polymedix trial treated 114 (40 low dose, 35 medium, and 39 high)
Cellceutix trial treated 153 (50 at dose of 0.6 mg/kg, 52 at dose of 0.8 mg/kg, and 51 at dose of 3-day regimen).
...one very big problem with YOUR inferred "premise"...
As per Brilacidin Fast Track Designation PR...
IPIX Brilacidin/Covid-19 trials will be commencing this month...within 60 days data and results will be reported.
Should we worry about BP or Deep State burying Brilacidin's anticipated "breakthrough" and "paradigm shift" results?
NO!...
Critics of Leo, IPIX and Brilacidin (even with B's RBL test results, Publicatino of Pre-Peer Review Article, IND approval and Fast Track Designation) will ask why?
Simple:
Kessler is to IPIX (DeGrado/Brilacidin)...as
Fauci was to Gilead (Remdesivir)
Totally irrational conclusion that Kessler (professor UCSF) and DeGrado (professor UCSF) do not know each other on a professional level at UCSF.
WITH ANTICPATED EXCELLENT BRILACIDIN TRIAL RESULTS...Kessler will have the influence, power and control in supporting the approving and promoting of the advancement of Brilacidin as an FDA approved Covid-19 Therapeutic.
TIAB...another great post! (LOL)
kfcyahoo...
you state about LEO leadership of IPIX:
"The reason IPIX is a pink sheet penny stock is because its CEO is a lying, incompetent, grasping clown."
One question...EXACTLY WHO IS (ARE) THE "LYING, INCOMPETENT, GRASPING CLOWN(S)"?
Leo...achieved much in 2020 with little financial resources...and backing...and is doing the same in 2021...
the following below demonstrate his accomplishments in furthering BRILACIDIN as a THERAPY to combat COVID-19.
NOW ...add to the list.... "FAST TRACK DESIGNATION" ...recognition by the FDA of reasonable potential of HUGE VALUE!
...detractors of Leo have only identified possibly two other biotech who received for a therapeutic candidate...maybe...who have received FTD for a Covid-19 Therapeutic candidate...
My response to your criticism: (if that is your definition of a CLOWN)
..."BRING ON THE CLOWNS!"
________________________________________________________________________
Accomplishments in 2020 and 2021 ... SO FAR:
-2/18 Initial announcement of Brilacidin for Covid 19
-2/24 Material transfer agreements to virology labs
-2/28 Brilacidin sent to Regional Biodefense Labs {RBL)for study
-3/2 Brilacidin PDF outlines scientific rationale for use against Covid19
-3/9 Brilacidin studies planned at RBL
-3/12 Testing to begin 3/16
-4/1 Brilacidin effective against Covid19 in Vero monkey cells
-4/6 Early discussions of human trials
-4/20 Screening of 11,552 compounds shows Brilacidin a leading drug against Covid19 by inhibiting the M-protease
-4/27 Initial research confirms anti Covid properties more research planned
-5/5 PHRI studies announced
-5/19 Brilacidin reduces Covid 75% in preincubtion Vero cell study
-5/26 Brilacidin reduces Covid in human renal cell line; blocks viral cell entry
-6/11 Brilacidin study to include MERS and SARS pan corona virus testing; Grant application application made
-6/17 Brilacidin inhibits Covid 97% in infected Human respiratory cells
-7/7 Brilacidin active against Covid 19 before during and after Covid infects cells
-7/13 Human clinical trial planning/manufacture of Brilacidin announced
-7/20 Brilacidin at low dosage is effective against Covid19; lower than ABSSI dose
-8/4 Brilacidin shown effective against entire Covid life cycle
-8/24 Brilacidin Selectivity index among highest reported
-8/26 Dr Degrado announced as science advisor
-9/15 Brilacidin synergistic with remdesivir;reduces viral load almost 100%
-10/2 Pre IND meeting; Brilacidin human clinical trials
-10/30 RBL preprint article released; Selectivity index 426 one of highest achieved
-11/2 FDA pre IND response received;CRO secured
-11/16 Overseas CTA submitted;Brilacidin viral resistance unlikely
-11/30 New research for Brilacidin as a pancoronavirus treatment
FDA application submitted
-12/21 Brilacidin for phase 2 Covid study approved
- 1/2021....NOW ... FAST TRACT DESIGNATION!!!
LilyGDog...you highlight the huge edge IPIX will have over (Non-fast-tract) therapy candidates...
...detractors of Leo won't admit it ... but Fast Tract Designation clearly indicates that the FDA believes Brilacidin (and possibly at the urging of a BP) success if very likely... an extremely positive development in Brilacidin..."coming out party"..
IMO even better news coming ... shortly! Look for "overseas" jurisdiction to give equivalent of "Fast Track" also!
Question about OWS..."Is fast track faster than OWS?"... OWS overlays Fast Track ... two run side by side.
Don't worry about the pennies...look at the dollars...and imo BP lurking and watching attentively...News will slowing spread for MOMO buildup...
ps. Sunspotter ...says..
It's also good, (as George pointed out), that in November IPIX filed a "provisional patient application" and as the form requires, must state the inventor (Kirshna Menon) and owner, IPIX...covering UC.
The application is a statement of fact...with Menon's consent not necessary ...just simply stating the facts at the time of application...including corporate address clarification (which is another NON-ISSUE...made out by some to be an issue with the filing)
Therefore IPIX has full patent protection for a period of one year from date of filing, and for those right and protections to continue, it must file a "Non-provisional Patent Application" before the end of that year, with all of the supporting documents necessary to acquire those rights.
....MEANWHILE...the company, by patent law, may advertise and state: "Patent Pending"
its not rocket science...or confusing as some responding on this board would like to make it out to be (and know better).
ALL THE MORE SUPPORT for believing that we should expect in the near future PR indicating IPIX moving forward with Brilacidin CT for UC. Any positive Brilacidin results on CT for UC will be protected by the filing until Nov. at which time, IPIX could be further reasonable to expect Leo to file the "Non-Provisional Patent Application"...which will give IPIX protection and patent rights until fully and successfully prosecuted.
Jhawker...
You are correct...in calling out of the referring to a landlord-tenant issue as "sloppy" and in some way is determinative of IPIX/Brilacidin's success or failure as insane and beyond irrational...(my embellishment)
Lease...non-issue
Besides being totally irrelevant to the science and task at hand of moving Brilacidin forward on Covid-19, UC and OM...
...as an aside to this non-issue, I, for one, am pleased the rent for this Commercial Space is not around the neck of the company.
In a billiantly thought out post...it was noted:
Dreamer0...Happy New Year
re: trials
... lots of speculation on the Trials...as to where IPIX is and what has been done and/or when...and on a totally as separate matter, the speculation on the drug source of reported Russian (alleged)"antidote".
IMO..."controlled release" of info is intentional.
I prefer the dribble of PRs as events happen in real time... But, there are those shorts who take advantage of short PR's, twist them and/or intentionally undermine them, questioning why there is not more information (in the form of Strawman questions) especially from this board (though I am told he does not read)...It's easier to question and dance on a short PR. I am not implying that is the reason, but perhaps Leo is looking at the most "impactful" PR to form a tapestry of Brilacidin's value.
IMO...bigger things and players are likely in play, as has been referenced in prior PRs and might be considered in the roll out of PRs.
The Question of whether IPIX has received a CTA from an "overseas" eastern Europe country (Russia, as discussed here before)...is an interesting one. "Overseas" jurisdictions are said to be easier (bureaucratically) than U.S. FDA, and it was reported in PR we got the IND/FDA. Also consider that the company isn't required to report everything as it happens...I believe it has 21 days to report such an event. So has it happened? Has 21 days passed?
Few would dispute that "now" is optimum time, and should be for several months, for recruiting CV trial candidates EVERYWHERE in the world...IPIX/CRO is or will likely have an easy time lining up sites previously screened, recruiting the candidates (if it has not already been completed).
I could see Leo waiting on reporting events (within 21 days of occurance if he lining up all completed thresholds he wants to accomplish for B, for its next phase of development, while he/CROs line up Covid-19 CT (and the other indications progress, which have been alluded to in previous PRs) on which he indicated he wanted Brilacidin to move forward.
IMO...in the next one to three (several) weeks we should see Brilacidin will blow away the competition as a Therapeutic ...at which point IMO IPIX should start going beyond the "serious look" phase to "serious actionable interest" phase by BP especially if we get, as cited in previous RP, movement on Brilacidin for the other indications PR'd (OM and UC.)
Perhaps the plan is letting it all rip at once with a MOA PR's...as there appears to be a lot that is or could be happening!
IMO, speculation about the Russian alleged "antidote"...as being Brilacidin...is likely misguided. As noted by others...the PR references the Russian gov. as "developing" the "antidote", (imo best they could be doing is to make a feeble attempt to take credit for Brilacidin...post trials..LOL) But, imo, even more misguided is believing they have one, or one that is 99% effective (or even 10%) effective.
https://112.international/russia/russia-promises-to-present-covid-19-antidote-57775.html.
If we look at the Sputnik vaccine "success" we can likely guess what the truth success of the supposed "Antidote" is and will be.
My personal GP happened to graduate from a major State Medical University which is a top medical university in Russia. https://fmsmu.com/about-university/...he has had conversations with some former colleagues in the hospitals...and told that the vaccine wards are empty. Few are taking it...few believe it works... It appears that is so because there is likely no anecdotal (or credible scientific) evidence in the street.
If we measure the success of the Sputnik Vaccine's by the credibility response of the Russian population...it is an utter failure. (likely does not work...but Putin, in his own mind, has to look like he's beating Trump...LOL)
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/12/24/949943260/putin-promotes-homegrown-covid-19-vaccine-but-most-russians-are-skeptical
Some further interesting development there is that Russia has been accused of underreporting cases and deaths by 2/3rds of official report...meaning they are 200% more or 3x that which has been reported...sounds like a crisis greater than the U.S and China (under-reporting by 10X).
Know what you own!
ps...before it is raised here...regarding credibility of "overseas" Clinical Trials..(from prior conversations with a 20+ year research MD who has run extensive overseas trials for 4 BP) it was explained that when internationally reputable CRO's supervise and run trials the "overseas gov." or the site hospital staff do not control the trial...they "facilitate" the order under direct supervision of and chain of custody controls by CROs ...identifying the right patients, using the equipment specified and sending it to and receiving it at the site etc is all controlled by CRO. Those CRO's establish the integrity of the trial...if they screw up...they don't get paid...a good incentive for getting it done right!
Full disclosure...I don't flip nor sell. I just add with each PR or as SP opportunities present itself.
RFMJ
I do not dispute your analysis...but consider this... upon "successful" phase II (120 patient CT in the process of being implemented) another alternative could be sitting on IPIX's doorstep...a say $350M-$450M BIOTECH MC SPAC...looking for a home. There are approxy 200 SPACS FORMED...looking for a home. (generic)
Solves fudsters faux issues of Uplisting and $ going forward:
1. Effectively, and immediate uplisting to NASDAQ or NYSE (sorry shorts) ... a 50/50 reverse acquisition with $400M war chest MC. This could result in $400/$70 = (almost) 6X multiple immediately PLUS appreciation going forward in new IPIX, while...
2. ...still leaving a $400M war chest for CT's on other indications AND, still applying for Grant $ with Bards/DOD (which application are reasonably to be expected with good news anyway).
PS. IMO..SUCCESSFUL CLINICAL TRIALS would likely take this option off the table...since imo...BP will move in when they realize the enormous opportunities and implications of Brilacidin with Covid-19, Pan-Coronaviruses and Brilacidin's other indications...(and that is without mentioning K)
PSS. FYI...a small fund who's principal is a modest SH (personally invested) in IPIX. His healthcare/biotech and generalist M&A is sending out feelers independent of IPIX for SPAC interest...but they likely get more aggressive upon our expected CT results.
Would SH and Leo accept SPAC offer, if any?...don't know I expect if one were to come terms would make it or break it...if one comes.
https://lifescivc.com/2020/10/its-raining-biotech-spacs/
ROIR...you posted:
"If it were not for RBL, (great results), IPIX would not have pursued Brilacidin for Covid"
Well that is very true!...Was that not the point of Leo/IPIX with "plausibility" encouragement from Dr. DeGrado putting out potential "mechanism for destruction" of Covid-19 by Brilacidin...so that RBL would Test B to prove out its theory. (IMO...I don't not doubt Wm DeGrado was able to informally educate (including RBL scientist) and inform many in the scientific community on Brilacidin's likelihood of very favorable results.)
BUT ALSO TRUE...was the apparent time-line for conclusion to testing was delayed because of RBLs internal issues...
...the two are not mutually exclusive!
It would be an erroneous and faulty inference that IPIX slowed down anything...esp. for $. when it obviously raised $6M for the trials during the recent spike and could proceed with trials.
DELAYS in completing and reporting tests results by the RBL took place after the capital for trials was already raised...so your "assumption" fails. It also assumes IPIX "held back" news...for which there is no evidence and as just pointed out...no purpose.
Also the addition of DeGrado (and the scientific credentials for Brilacidin) was his primary value, and as was his function as scientific advisor and consultant, both of which come with him...DeGrado IS an invaluable scientific advisor ...NOT the CEO (Leo), who drove and propelled company to this point of commencing the FDA sanctioned Human Clinical Trials of Brilacidin for Covid-19 (...and whom several on this board contended could not get us here.) To believe DeGrado arrived so that Leo could take his eye off of B for C...underestimates the amount of work required to get Brilacidin recognized and worthy of receiving IND approval.
I would not waste time on the other poster who takes the position that B for C study/CT is a scam. the assertion is beyond ABSURD...and would require the following as co-conspirators in the scam:
Dr. Wm DeGrado -world renowned scientist/developer of Brilacidin
George Mason University - reports from virus/coronavirus scientific experts
Rutgers University - reports from virus/coronavirus scientific experts
2 U.S Regional Bio-containment Laboratories- reporting superlative human tissue test result.
U.S. FDA granting IND approval after review.
I believe the board knows who the scam artists are...and its not Leo or IPIX.
No...the proper reference to my error is not "hypocracy" but "inaccurate usage in the context" of what I was pointing out when I used the phrase:
"Past performance (sales/licensing) = Future performance"
...It does not fit in the context of what Lemoncat was implying and asking readers to assume...which was essentially that because Leo had monetized one asset in a certain way...all assets would be valued and monetized in the exact same way...which of course is an assumption and conclusion void of context, time and circumstances and therefore ... completely a faulty assumption and inaccurate conclusion...
Thank you for pointing that out and giving me the opportunity to clarify!
Lemoncat...
You are making assumptions that are critically fatal to your reasoning and conclusion. "Past performance (sales/licensing) = Future performance"
It fails to consider the issue of WHO HAS LEVERAGE, (or NO LEVERAGE) ...in the relationship between IPIX and BP
1. Financial Leverage - In every open market "buy/sell" relationship...the question becomes who in the relationship has the financial leverage...This will determine it the Seller receives fair value, a fraction of value.
e.g. If you own with a $150K mortgage and FVM of $500K... Why would you ever sell it for $300K? What would influence your decision to sell it at that "ridiculous price"? A number of Reasons...but the most common one...If you are out of a job, don't have any savings, and in foreclosure, with 30 days before a sheriff's sale (most homeowners in foreclosure wait to the last minute before they wake up and do something). So if you don't want to risk losing ALL of your $350K equity...you sell far below the FMV before the foreclosure date and walk away with $150K. Is that Sale Price FMV? No! but outside circumstances (foreclosure) force your hand and the sale.
If you had $1M in the bank and not in foreclosure, you would wait it out until you got your $500K and might even be surprised that a bidding war ensues and two people "just have to have it"...and bid it up to $650K!
YOU MAKE THE FALSE ASSUMPTION: "Since we know Leo can be depended on to hold out for something at least close to full value, then I assume you feel the B-UP deal was close to full value." Sale Price = Fair Value... WTF? You are assuming Leo had financial leverage when he licensed B-UP...in fact he did not...he needed the cash and did a fire sale to keep the company alive. Great Decision...at the time (which is the only way to judge the quality of a decision)...leaving IPIX with a rich portfolio of other Brilacidin indications...(It was an even better decision than most realize since IPIX can "buy back" B-UP upon buyer's failure to proceed with development...which is happening.)
2. Market Demand Leverage - Depending upon the buyer demand at a given time for the asset a Seller is marketing..the Seller might receive more or less $...vs what appraisers might consider FMV at another time. Besides the Seller needing to raise capital (#1 above) ...the number of Pharmaceutical firms in the market for B-UP, its stage of development, the "fitting" into a portfolio, and terms of license...ALL impact final "license/Sale" price.
In fact...your "extrapolation" reasoning and resulting conclusion: "(Ulcerative Proctitis has a fairly stable number of cases per year and likely will for the duration of the patent)"...is ridiculously SIMPLISTIC...and logically fatally flawed. You assume no financial stress influencing the "sale/license" (#1 above) and that there was a thorough marketing to all BP trying to develop a cure for UP, and/or that firms interested would all have the same degree of interest at that time in prioritizing its development. To develop a formula, and apply it to any other indication for Brilacidin is fatally flawed.
While ultimate breath of market (sales) of Brilacidin for one indication (covid-19) is a factor in the value determination for B, of immediate relevancy...is its potential for Pancoronavirus cures and all of the other indications which goes well beyond Covid-19. Also consider BP's desire to be first to market (and perhaps the only BP) with a truly "effective" covid-19 killer...and the value added to their Brand recognition. Think IPIX leverage...
3. Publicity/Recognition Leverage - The tremendous NEED for an effective therapeutic...with the potential of Brilacidin and breath (pancoronaviruses)indications...will prevent BP from burying the IPIX/Brilacidin story...Trial results and their implications will be VERY PUBLIC, and cannot be suppressed, even by BP. Once these results are recognized by FDA, public demand (and publicity) will take over...giving IPIX/Brilacidin the leverage required for negotiating with BP...
You will not see BP sitting back...risking that its competition will break ranks and pursue Brilacidin for their own portfolio... IMO...reaching a RBL level of success in Clinical Trials will have BP banging on IPIX's door.
Trials count...and IMO it will be the silver bullet to unleashing Brilacidin's value to IPIX and shareholders.
And remember...BRILACIDIN HAS NEVER FAILED A CLINICAL TRIAL!
Know what you own!
Your Post:
NEW POTENTIAL INVESTORS...need to read ALL of the IPIX Company PR's as noted by Farrell...a terrific summary.
YOU also need to know that the BODY of Scientific Test results and former Clinical Trials...have demonstrated POSITIVE SUCCESS AND EFFICACY each time...
FACT: Brilacidin has NEVER FAILED in any of the 8 HUMAN Clinical Trials (in other indications) and has consistently demonstrated in U.S. Regional Bio-containment Laboratories the HIGHEST TEST RESULTS in reducing Covid-19 VIRAL LOAD of any Therapeutic Candidate.
FACT: No IPIX detractor can refute the enormous prospective results expected from BRILACIDIN based on the science... (they trash the CEO, Leo...who got us here...
FACT: THE REST IS BULL SH*T!
Funding for trials have been raised...and IPIX is full steam ahead. IMO trials results...will result in huge $ coming into IPIX to fund manufacturing of product etc...IF, of course, IPIX is not acquired by BP before hand.
KNOW WHAT YOUR OWN...do the DD reading...and listen to Farrell and others who understand the truth of the enormous upside potential of Brilacidin and IPIX.
Re: Merck receives $356 Million for therapeutic development...
Interesting with the limited success, (50% reduction of "risk of respiratory failure or death vs placebo standard of care), of "therapeutic" MK-7110...Merck reaps a approximately $356 million from Barda and DOD.
The question is: What could IPIX reap with Brilacidin reducing viral count...by almost 100% reduction and resulting and similar risk benefits?
IND approval ... is further validity to potential of Brilacidin!
You only need to LISTEN to the FDA, RBLs and Dr. DeGrado...(not the flippers/fudsters.)
Know what you own!
PS. Looking forward PR announcement of CT site locations in U.S. and Overseas and Overseas CTA*.
*Russia...thanks to WSBC "research" (see email below)
SUN..so wrong again...
"Completing" site initiation visits makes it sound like they've already started site initiation visits, and that therefore there's a possibility the trial will start in the near future.
Dollar to a cent that they haven't started site initiation yet at all."
...WRONG AGAIN...LEO indicated they HAVE sites (likely overseas done) and imo will finalize the U.S. sites meaning sign agreements which I am sure were lined up but not executed for U.S. ... likely only have to now financially commit to those...and off the drug goes to those sites...
Leo's MO...he starts nothing with out knowing he can finish it. i.e money raised for these trials (not for a rainy day fund!)
136...you state:
You make the statement that IPIX would have to TERMINATE the ASPIRE financing Agreement, if IPIX wanted to make another deal with at third party...
Actually ... word is that the "McDonalds" meeting will likely be at the McDonald's, located at 302 Potrero Ave, San Francisco, CA 94110 which is a five minute walk from DeGrado Laboratory at the Mission campus of UCSF...easier to walk a few blocks and eat outside tables and to be Covid-19 social distant compliant...and also saves a bit of time... much better location than walking to McDonalds in Hempstead, NY...even though SF location is not as racially diverse than Hempstead, NY...but hey...less likely to pick up Covid with such a short walk.
Of course I could email "Bill" DeGrado again, and suggest he invite Former Surgeon General Vivek Murthy...why not...think "diversity"...its an a critical element of "the Science"...wouldn't you say? (besides...that Micky D's has a great "Chicken Currie" Breakfast Roll...I am told!)
Going back to more serious and constructive conversation..."spreading the word" and doing "advance PR work"...has been constructive
..."awareness" and laying the ground-work...being the first step in support and promotion at "the right time". Process has always been building awareness Brick by Brick...not instant organism.
IMO...My uneducated guess is that Leo would prefer the engagement from those who will support and promote... when, the Clinical Trials indicates the superlative performance of Brilacidin "killing" Covid systemically, as expected, with influencers aware of "Brilacidin".
Timing is always a bitch...as with RG. It would have been great PR, of course, if Rudy just waited a couple of weeks so that he could get his "Right to Try" dosage of Brilacidin...(I knew I should have sent that Memo to his personal attorney...damn!)
Anyway...at this point, I would expect (shall I say IMO, Guess, Personally Believe, based upon PRs or whatever "qualifier" you want to suggest)* with the anticipated "overseas" Ministry of Health trial authorization and Brilacidin drug in place, awaiting that Ministry of Health approval (*IMO then within days of that approval)...we will see the commencement of trials before EOY...as stated in PRs.
As you noted ... 3 members on the "proposed" Biden Covid-19 Task Force are from University of California San Francisco (UCSF). Of course Dr. Wm DeGrado, IPIX's Scientific Advisor and who discovered/developed Brilacidin is not only a Professor at UCSF, but a world renowned and awarded Scientist, but has a Scientific Laboratory in his name at UCSF.
The question posed was whether the 3 UCSF members on the proposed Task Force by the not yet President Elect know one another. It would be beyond reason for them not to know of their colleague , Dr. DeGrado is one one the most scientifically awarded of this group... but will they contact him?
The question is "Why wouldn't they"...especially with Human Clinical Trials soon to arrive...IMO Dr. DeGrado's office conference room will be very crowded and before the EOY. (More outside DD on this matter coming)
Also we have an associate who knows and has access to Co-Chairman Dr Murthy to the "proposed" Task Force, upon Brilacidin's commencement of "Overseas" CT, this associate has offered to personally introduce Dr. Murthy to Brilacidin, so that he will be brought up to date on the pan-coronavirus attributes of Brilacidin...as well as its trifecta attributes which IMO will demonstrate total destruction of virus in CT patients.
Stay tuned!
Farrell