Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[falconer66a]

Today, where’s the evidence for MOA failure?

This [the Anavex mechanisms of action, MOAs] has been shown in Clincal Trials and is not disputed by Scientists.

Exactly.

Five years ago, a lot of “scientists” thoroughly discounted the Anavex molecules as effective and safe therapeutic agents, especially for the central nervous system (CNS) diseases being targeted by the company. “Can’t work.” “No evidence of efficacy.” “The sigma-1 receptor protein can’t play any part in Alzheimer’s etiology.” “Lot’s of other molecules bind to, are sigma-1 receptor protein ligands, and nothing happens. Will be the same for Anavex’s molecules.” Etc.

Ok, what was the most recent posting by a knowledgeable scientist telling why and how the Anavex sigma-1 receptor agonists (activators) don’t and can’t work? In the last year or two, stone silence on the matter. No explanations of exactly why blarcamesine can’t or doesn’t work; merely that Phase 3 clinical trials aren’t complete yet, so “no one can know.”

Postings telling how the Anavex MOA is wrong, in error, no longer appear. In fact, it would seem that those “scientists” formerly naysaying the Anavex MOA now know better. There is plenty of evidence, from both murine (lab rodent) and human clinical trials that the Anavex MOA works, well, and safely. The only naysaying left for the anti-Anavex crowd is, “Well, we’ll just have to wait for the big Alzheimer’s trial to end. Nothing can be sure until then. Lots of prototype CNS drugs fail in Phase 3 trials.”

Won’t the silence of the perennial Anavex naysayers be a refreshing delight when the FDA or TGA (Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration) approves blarcamesine for Alzheimer’s? Especially, the final, desperate pronouncements that “This approval is in error, and people taking the drug will suffer.”