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.
Wrong again:
You need to go look at the accidental start of the era of antibiotics. What did happen? Why was it significant? Research Lab results Should have been ignored (according to your thinking), not supposed to happen. Old Pharma massive trial methods have proven nothing about discovery, reproducibility, yes. Predictions of certain failure are now recognized by even the BP thinkers as evidenced by their abandoned Amyloid trial methods. That is all they proved. BTW, these massive trials were carefully done according to methods you would no doubt find acceptable.
If one trial being conducted to evaluate safety resulted in some num. of patients(even one) actually reversing their dementia progression, then that result must be understood. According to your thinking these results mean nothing and must be ignored or somehow rationalized away. Had that happened w/Fleming and follow ups then antibiotics discoveries would have had to wait for some conventionally acceptable method. The very best researchers see things that should not have happened and then work to understand WHY. When a breakthrough happens (as possibly in A2-73 AU safety trials) ignoring the results that should not be there is not OK. You will soon see (AAIC-2018) the beginning of CNS disease treatment evolution.
You may also soon start to see the term "Binary Event" being used.
AVXL board challenge.
Answer this question w/facts:
Will ANAVEX be presenting as part of the upcoming July-2018 AAIC conference in Chicago? What will the title of the presentation be?
Note: AAIC says they will notify authors on June 4, 2018.
Prize to winner: A 50 round box of 0.45 ACP 230 gr.
Also saw that AAIC in Chicago in July will be sending notices to candidate authors on June 4 (next week-unless late breaking). If this is the conference Dr.M. keeps talking about then this could be an interesting period for changes. Sure am glad I do not own any of the amyloid plaque pushers stuff.
Let's not wait and do this again w/A2-73 etal
https://www.alz.org/aaic/abstracts/overview.asp
Other info....
Abstracts submitted Jan 29, 2018
Topic notice sent to presenting author June 4, 2018
Submissions Posters Only unless considered "late Breaking"
My own notice-observation: It looks like a majority of the topical papers/posters in 2017 mention or refer to Amyloid in the title. It will be interesting to see how many this year will include amyloid in title line.
jmv...thank you...AAIC -July-Chicago. Looking forward to news between now and then also. Anyone w/connections/sources should go on the point for us.
Likely upcoming conference news (AD/RS/PDD) A2-73?
What are the best thoughts on when/where Dr.M. will be doing next major conference A2-73 presentation?
What conference? Why? When? Where? Other?
It's always good to see Falconers posts.
Yup, we'll se I guess. There was shown a definite correlation between the drive to 2$ sp by posting irrational harassment here and the index date. In the future longs should remember this.
Right to try sounds plausible, in particular for CNS diseases as long as FDA controls/facility licenses (define, document and do) on where and how drugs are made are still effective.
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/388871-house-passes-right-to-try-sends-bill-to-trumps-desk
Bios...great post, thanks.
Roger that Talon.
After Looking closely at the Precision Medicine model w/new IND C/l requirements we can see that someone has been asleep in the tower for a long time. I am no expert but it is actually embarrassing when you look at how they processed the trials. It looks like they were watching for something to produce results which (I guess) could then be universally analyzed/applied to some population of AD patients. They literally had no idea what the treatment process would produce. They all did more or less the same thing. So, a lot of AD patients got "treated", some had brain bleed, some had swelling, other reactions but not one ever recovered.
I agree w/you that Dr.G. has at least stopped the train. How he did that so effectively and quietly w/o one word of wonder/question across so many massive news/political, Medical PR's, pharma organizations w/ so many people impacted is impressive. Only now, months after they called it off, are we seeing the occasional (saw one here yesterday) news piece on the failed Amyloid plaque thing. Wait a minute, we just spent a decade ++, spent Billions of $$$, sucked up FDA resources, BP talent/resources WW, thousands of AD patients/w/families (at least DEFCON 3) and all they have to say is ..."Never Mind". Part of learning involves failure analysis and discussing what DOES NOT WORK. It's called readiness training. Kicking ass works even in our new PC world.
Thanks again for your Air Force service, great pass.
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/precisionmedicine/definition
Precision Medicine and the street? CNS disease complexity? Now What?
Now that the established research models for how to invest in CNS treatment Pharma have been nuked what are the street investors going to do? The IPO float/scam guys have to re-tool. Sad isn't it? BP's exclusive hold on max (n) trials w/massive $$$ WW sites and secret handshakes is ALL GONE. A game that only the privileged few could afford.
As far as we know, Dr. M. has been on the ("NO REALLY", FIND OUT WHAT CAUSES IT) trail for a few years now, while the rest of them were redefining their statistical model rationalizations. Then some fool in Oncology started a new process concept and (what do you know) it worked. (much to the concern of the toxic chemical/radiation bombardment crowd).
Precision medicine suggests the clinicians spend time to actually research what gut genom/environmental/other causa links exist. Then, after narrowing the chase, target specific patients based on science, not shot-gunning. The questions then become not "IF" the treatment works at all but "How on many patients". Ensure the study presents evidence of efficacy? Not IF but WHEN.
Will the STREET systems actually allow such investments to even happen or will they be compelled to JUST GO BUY or ATTACK?
We'll see. In my opinion, that kind of process is what we will see. How will it play out, what will it look like? Look for change everywhere. As Musashi would say, "the Pen and the sword, in accord."
Not clear how we will know who is on first in this new model, we can say that change is happening though. The FDA should lead but I doubt they will. The good news is, the bad old days in CNS disease treatment development/research are likely gone. Change cannot be too soon for many.
Powerwalker...
[quote Let us all hope through change at the FDA, drugs from Anavex, and increased personal responsibility that we can start to reverse the downward trend in the cost/average age @death curve. ][/quote]
A number of people on this thread present a theme which I happen to also agree with. The FDA represents the healthcare "system" for lack of better term. An old Irish expression comes to mind when I think of the system after listening to the long text of everything that might go wrong (i.e., AE commercial labeling is laughable if it were not so serious)when using pharma products. Try this instead," Unconstrained by knowledge we moved on.". In spite of the best efforts of some of the smartest people on the planet, the system must be fed. The system uses and produces money and it is not a perpetual motion device. The curve that Xena posts on life expectancy in U.S. vs. cost is telling us that if that is the metric (I believe it might be) then the system has failed badly. There must be a better way. Who will declare that and when? Then what...take no meds?
Just maybe, somewhere buried in Dr.M.'s thesis on (re)establishing CNS cellular homeostasis the truth will surface from the wasted efforts and on AD and other CNS diseases. Wouldn't it be great if we learned that in all the possible subatomic/microbiologic combinations and permutations re-establishing cellular homeostasis is the solution and AVXL has such available now. No wonder BP and the system are scared, they can see it coming.
treden...agree w/your sentiment and w/your thoughts on how the FDA-BP system works. Not sure how it explains the cost/average age @death curve.
I have close relatives who are very familiar w/the cycles in DC and w/personalities. Let's just say the original design plan was for these people to go to DC for a couple of cycles and then go back to the farm. But, now when they get to DC they quickly learn it is the BEST GIG around and they hang out for decades. All of them seem to acquire great wealth somehow in the process. Beyond just good luck many have attributed their genius for wealth to getting and using good investment information.
I also see the president as you described him, he is kicking axx and they cannot stand it. Anyone who has ever worked for a living understands his actions pretty well. Let's hope he cleans the place out.
OK...fare enough. I have some personal evidence I will review for possible linkage. Until then, delete as appropriate.
Not at the moment...will look and let you know. My example referred to reported practices in Canada and obviously anecdotal V.A. reports in U.S..
Thanks for the information. My first read says cost of U.S. Healthcare and efficacy do not compare favorably many other countries. Could it be that making someone wait for 6 months to get an x-ray is simply good financial management practices? Are we overly cautious?