If this is indeed true then they should publish something in the
scientific literature to prove to everyone how wonderful their
technology is. Why not?

I have actually signed one of these in the past for a different
company, and know other researchers who have also. When you have
good results the company wants you to publish, otherwise they
don't want you to say anything.

You are correct.
If you go to
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
and enter
Harris E[Author] AND dengue
in the search box you will get a list of 110 articles which have
E Harris as an author and related to dengue. Not one of these
mentions denguecide.
The utter lack of published scientific articles and presentations
at scientific conferences is a sure sign that this is a sham.
Why would they not want to prove to the world that they have what
they say they have?
I am sure glad I sold all my shares and got all my money out.
I wanted to believe that the tech would work, and maybe it would,
but I think the company is a sham to keep Diwan and Seymour, and the
rest, getting their paychecks. I think they will stretch this out
for as long as possible and then declare the company bankrupt.

Well that asteroid missed Earth by 2 million miles, about like your prediction missing the mark.
Somehow I am not surprised that your wife and kids don't listen to you.

I didn't predict anything will happen on the 19th.

Number One is out.

Item 5.02 Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.

On January 18, 2014, Mr. Jeffrey L. Masten gave notice of resignation, effective February 20, 2014, as Vice President, Quality of Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”). The duties performed by Mr. Masten will be reassigned to existing qualified personnel within the Company.

Number three is out. Look at a calendar, the 19th is on Wednesday.

I would say this prediction will be about as good as Sierra's.
Remember her? For entertainment purposes only!
As Genecloner says, "I am not sure why I feel this way...I can't let go of this feeling..."

From the PR on Feb 4th.
Tuesday, February 4th, 2014 - NanoViricides, Inc. (NYSE MKT: NNVC) (the “Company”) reported today that it
has signed a “confidential disclosure agreement” (“CDA”) with Viroclinics Biosciences, BV (“Viroclinics”), a
spinoff of the Department of Viroscience at the Erasmus Medical Centre (“Erasmus”) in Rotterdam, the
Netherlands.

New Journal of Virology paper published ahead of print on Jan 29, 2014. Shows off their testing abilities.

Novel Avian-Origin Influenza A (H7N9) Virus Attachment to the Respiratory Tract of Five Animal Models
Jurre Y. Siegers a, Kirsty R. Short a, Lonneke M.E. Leijten a, Miranda de Graaf a, Monique I.J. Spronken a, Eefje J.A. Schrauwen a, Nicolle Marshall b, Anice C. Lowen b, Gülsah Gabriel c, Albert D.M.E Osterhaus a, Thijs Kuiken a and Debby van Riel a#
- Author Affiliations

a Department of Viroscience, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
b Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
c Heinrich-Pette-Institute, Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology, Hamburg, Germany

ABSTRACT
We determined the attachment pattern of avian-origin H7N9 influenza viruses A/Anhui/1/2013 and A/Shanghai/1/2013 to the respiratory tract in ferrets, macaques, mice, pigs and guinea pigs, and compared it to that in humans. The H7N9 attachment pattern in macaques, mice, and to a lesser extent pigs and guinea pigs resembled that in humans more closely than the attachment pattern in ferrets. This knowledge contributes to our knowledge on the different animal models for influenza.

It would be nice to see the ORR and TTP data for a subset of patients from the trial,
but I think that is all we are likely to get at this point.

I for one will never look at the seeking Alpha website again. I say boycott it now.

This is a one-arm trial. There is no comparison of bavi+sorafenib to sorafenib alone.
This is exactly why people have unreasonable expectations, because they don't
even do the most basic of checking as to what the facts are.

As Entdoc has replied, I think expectations from this trial are overblown.
This is a phase I/II trial with eventually 56 patients, it is still enrolling.
The interim results to be reported on will not contain mOS data
since the trial has not even closed enrollment yet. In addition, the primary
outcomes are for safety (phase I) and Time to Progression (phase II),
with overall survival as the secondary outcome. We do know that biopsy data
is being collected, so that will be valuable for evaluating the MOA.
Also, the trial is testing three levels of bavituximab (0.3, 1.0, and 3.0 mg/kg)
so there will not be very many patients at 3.0 mg/kg, the dose in SUNRISE.
In other words, this is not a trial for comparing bavi + sorafenib to SOC (sorafenib),
since it is a single arm, open label, trial with a relatively small number of patients.
Of course, I am hoping for good results from this trial so that a larger
phase II trial could be done. I just think the expectations for the interim
results are out of proportion from what is likely to be presented.
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01264705?term=Bavituximab+OR+Peregrine&recr=Open&rank=4

Entdoc. I don't have great expectations for the HCC trial either.
To me it looks like pancreatic cancer all over again. The presentation
by Dr. Yopp is March 13th, so our fate may be sealed by then!

Genecloner are you privy to insider information?
Does it have anything to do with this?
AACR annual meeting abstracts
http://www.aacr.org/home/scientists/meetings--workshops/aacr-annual-meeting-2014/abstracts.aspx
PUBLICATION OF ABSTRACTS
To assist attendees in planning their schedule for the meeting, accepted abstract titles will be made available online beginning February 19. Abstract bodies will not be made available online until March 5, one month prior to the meeting. (Late-Breaking Abstracts will be made available on April 4, the day before the start of the meeting.) Abstracts that have been selected for inclusion in the AACR press program will be made publicly available at the date and time of their presentation, either at the meeting or an official AACR press conference.

P.S.I know by posting this it will generate all kinds of wild speculation and half-assed theories, none of which will turn out to be true.
I assume that you are referring to Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Possible pandemic threat from H7N9
http://www.eurosurveillance.org/Default.aspx

I was trying to verify what I could. I have no way of checking on the
Harvard Ph.D claim. DO you? Exactly what is your purpose here?
You seem to be nothing but a short seller intent on destroying the company.

I have shown that these major elements of his bio are true. That is,
that Dr. Menon worked at Eli Lilly on Alimta, and that he worked at
Dana Farber with Dr. Frei, and that he does hold some patents.
How you judge this is up to you.

More on Dr. Menon. The NanoViricides webpage on him has a few mistakes.
http://www.nanoviricides.com/otherofficers.html
"Thereafter he came to the Dana Farber Cancer Research Institute and obtained a PhD in Pharmacology in 1984 from Harvard University. He worked under the direction of Nobel Laureate Dr. Tom Frye. His PhD work involved anti-folate therapy of various cancers, which has led to the extremely important drugs, methotrexate and recently, the blockbuster Alimta."

The correct name is Dr. Emil "Tom" Frei, who was not a Nobel Laureate, but maybe should have been.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/science/emil-frei-iii-who-put-cancer-cures-in-reach-dies-at-89.html?_r=0

However, here is a paper that has both Drs. Frei and Menon as coauthors while at Dana Farber Cancer Institute.

Here is some verification of Dr. Menon's background. From the Nanoviricides webpage:
http://www.nanoviricides.com/otherofficers.html
"Thereafter, he was Group Leader, Cancer In Vivo Research and Clinical Development, at Eli Lilly and Company during 1995-2001. He was responsible for the development of the anticancer drugs Cryptophycin and the blockbusters, Gemzar and Alimta."

Before it was approved Alimta was known as LY231514.
Here is a paper from 2000 about this showing Krishna Menon as a coauthor from Lily.
http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/6/3/1016.long



Here is one of his patents:

Filed: May 14, 2010

Smallpox was eradicated in 1977 so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Chikungunya is on the move. A possible target for a nanoviricide and a Novavax vaccine?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/world/americas/virus-advances-through-east-caribbean.html?hp

For treating HIV I was referring more to the practical matters like treating first
with cyclophspamide and then removing the stem cells and treating them with the ZFP
and then reinfusing the stem cells. It just seems too complicated and expensive to
have a wide application.

I haven't heard from him yet.

Exactly. My question is does treatment with a nanoviricide create cellular
debris from the virus, or whatever it attaches to, that could be used by the immune
system to induce immunity? Or, does the nanoviricide just encase the virus and
produces nothing useful to the immune system? That is the question I asked
Dr. Seymour about. This was motivated by a question about using nanoviricides
as a possible cancer treatment.

He didn't know and so referred me to Dr. Barton.

Yes, I did clarify that point. I didn't mean to confuse things.

I should amend this and say that if you got influenza you would be immune to future infection
with the same virus, but by next year the virus will likely mutate and you won't be immune.

If the virus changes, like influenza does, then you do not have immunity to it. Measles, on the other hand, gives you long-term protection. So if a non-vaccinated person got measles and used nanoviricides to treat it they probably would have immunity to future infection, but it has nothing to do with the nanoviricides. My question was addressing a different question.

Sorry for the duplicate.

I have e-mailed Dr. Seymour and talked to him on the phone about this.

It is theoretically possible, but is there any data which shows that this is true in animals?
I would like to read it if it is out there.
You might be confusing nanoviricides with Novavax's virus-like-particle vaccine technology.
For example with influenza, nanoviricides can kill the virus, but next year you can get infected all over again.

Except that giving someone nanoviricides might reduce the virus in that patient to zero,
but so far we don't know that it gives that patient any immunity to future infection
with the same virus. So at any one time there will be people infected with the virus
and they can infect other people, including those previously treated with nanoviricides.
It is only by vaccination that you can induce immunity and so progressively reduce
the at-risk population. I have wondered if treatment with nanoviricides can induce immunity.
If the treatment were to create fragments of the viral envelope with protein antigens then
the macrophages and dendritic cells might be able to use that to induce immunity.
It would be an "in situ" vaccination if you like. A lot of research would be needed to check this out.

You keep saying that Sangamo has huge potential. So far I just see their technology
as being applied to diseases which result from a change in a single gene.
That makes it a niche market for niche diseases. Most diseases (like cancer)
result from changes to many, many genes. Those genes also do many other things,
so if you change them there will likely be many unanticipated side effects.
Even the treatment for HIV doesn't seem feasible for practical reasons.

What?? That is exactly what I said. Nanoviricides are not going to eliminate any viruses in circulation.
Only by vaccination is that possible, and then only in the few that occur only in humans.

NanoViricides are not going to eliminate any virus scourges from mankind.
The viruses will still be out there circulating. The only virus ever eliminated
has been smallpox, and only after a multi-decadal global vaccination program.

This is from the Dec 3, 2013 report by Dr. Seymour.
Says Q1/Q2 2015

From the Jan 27th PR we know that the cGMP plant is not quite finished yet, and then testing and validation needs to be done. I would say quite a while yet before production begins. The schedule released called for phase 1 trial to begin in 2015.

"The Company reports that its project for enabling clinical scale drug product cGMP capability at the Shelton facility is now nearing completion of construction. After construction is complete, the facility, and particularly the cGMP Clean Room Suites will undergo facility testing and validation to ascertain that the facility satisfies the requirements. After validation, the Company plans to occupy the new facility while keeping the current facility active to minimize impact on the multiple nanoviricides® drug development projects. The Company intends to first start production of FluCide in the cGMP section, set up appropriate cGMP operation for this production, produce multiple batches of FluCide under cGMP conditions, and demonstrate equivalence of the batches produced, in preparation for human clinical trials."

Great investment advice!!
Sorry, I couldn't resist. LOL

I don't own Sangmo and won't. I do hold Novavax, just as you do, and want to
buy more, but it is going under $5 soon and so I will wait.
Sometimes the macro picture dominates and it is worth paying attention to it.