Bocxman, another theory I have to explain the non-traditional path Biocurex has followed is this:
Biocurex's SAB is second-to-none, and includes all of the major figures in the cancer marker field. It is possible that some sort of deal with Abbott was "conceived of" very early on, by people in both Abbott and Biocurex, perhaps years before the actual deal was announced. I'm not suggesting something shady or nerfarious occurred, just that there may have been connections of a very informal kind, but which are very common in academic and industry circles, between Abbott and Biocurex, that made the deal between the two companies a "natural" one. The "connections" I am thinking of are things like key individuals in both companies having shared interests in cancer markers, or a desire by Abbott to enter that market space, or common educational or professional backgrounds on the part of key individuals. Based on these sorts of connections, Abbott could very well have been aware of or informally "involved" with Biocurex very early on, perhaps advising them to follow the path Moro has followed. They may have said "just do the internal studies, and if the numbers continue to look good, we'll sign a deal and assume the burden of conducting the additional studies required to bring RECAF to the market as a product."
Why do I think this? Because the people at Biocurex are not "outsiders." They're insiders who are very connected to anyone involved with marker technology and research, and those connections could include key people at Abbott. Think of the ISOBM connections--Biocurex repeatedly presents at the ISOBM conference on markers, partly sponsored by Abbott, publishes in the ISOBM journal "Tumor Biology," whose editorial board includes individuals on the Biocurex SAB.
AI
