BioCurex, Inc.(fka BOCX)

[opportunityknocking]

Message from Dr Moro:
The following are questions that have been posted to this discussion board recently and answered by Dr. Moro. Neither the questions, nor the answers were edited by AGORACOM.

Your detailed discussion of the C/N ratio was very informative. I think I understand it now, but was just wondering ... is it analogous to the Signal/Noise ratio used in electronics?

No. In electronics there is noise coming from different sources. For example, in radio waves you have static produced more or less at random by other radio sources (including lightning in electric storms which cover a broad spectrum). You also have thermal noise, which is produced in a wire or a transistor conducting electricity. In immuno-assays such as ours, there is also “noise” which comes in the form of non-specific binding of the labeled molecule (RECAF in our case) to the plastic of the container where the reaction takes place. This noise is irrelevant because the measurements are “ratiometric”, that is, the reading of a sample is compared to the readings of a set of standards of known concentration and the value is extrapolated from the “standard curve” obtained with those standards.




As happens with all other biological markers, normal people have some RECAF in circulation –it is not noise, it is actual RECAF- and cancer people have more. The C/N ratio is the average of the RECAF values in cancer patients over the average of RECAF values in normal individuals in a given set of samples. If there is too much background (which is what happened in the poster presented in 2007 along with Abbott), the C/N is reduced (suppose the normal average = 3,000 Units and the cancer average = 6,000 Units. You would have a C/N=2. However, if there were 2,000 Units of background (or noise) then the normal average = 5,000 and the cancer average = 8,000. Thus the C/N ratio = 1.6. In terms of discrimination, however, it makes no difference because the noise is constant. The solution (which has already been attained) is to reduce the background.



I am looking at this situation as an outsider and you would garner tremendous clout and a major boost in confidence if you would get Abbott or Inverness to begin to acknowledge Recaf. It is bizarre as a shareholder to never reference Recaf on their websites. Will we ever see us on their websites and spoken openly and not treated as though we are a top secret experiment?


I appreciate this comment but that is not how they operate. In addition, it is not in their best interest to promote a technology they have not yet introduced in the market because while that might draw the attention of competitors, it offers no benefit to them.


Question: How do you see the future of cancer diagnostics?

IMO this is how I view it but what is the perception of the industry?

The ultimate patient's questions about cancer.
Do I have it?
What type is it?
Where is it located?
Can it be removed?

Is it gone yet?
Has it returned?

Healthcare (in or out of the hospital) follows a mode of operation. They start with a general assesment and narrow in on the root cause. Recaf may be used first to screen the general population to test for the presence of any type cancer.

Keep in mind that 1 in 3 people will develop cancer in a lifetime. That also means that 2 in 3 will not get cancer. This negative group in the US. population is equal to about 220 million people assuming our population is 360 million. This same assumption means that 1 billion Chinese will be effected but 2 billion will not.

It would be very expensive for the insurance companies to test each person with a pallet of say 20 types of biomarkers specific to only one type of cancer.

I see an industry that will start with a Recaf to separate Cancerous persons from non cancerous persons. Those with cancer will then be exposed to a pallet of cancer specific biomarkers and or scanned to internally locate it.

This multi pallet would most likely contain many biomarkers such as Recaf, EPCA-?, CEA and other highly sensitive markers we have not even heard of yet.

The scan will be "X" and will need to show where it is, if it is operable or if it has been reduced in size. Ultimately the scan will assist in the destruction of the cancer via some type of delivery device.

The bottom line is the only markers that will not be used are those that cannot keep pace with the new ones coming out. I would assume that the Area under the curve (AUC) results will determine this answer. As it stands now, Biocurex has a tremendous front line of tools.

That pretty much sums it up.

I would like to know if we are currently talking with any major cancer institutions, research centers, hospitals, or universities about our ELISA test or are you waiting for the ISOBM? Competition is healthy and expected with any product or service, but do you see any threats with any of the competing markers. This needs clarification. My belief is that we are unique in that it is a universal cancer marker. Isn't that what sets us apart from the competition? Wouldn't that make us the only test sensitive enough to become the only rapid test brought to the market? Thanks for creating this more civil environment and allowing for proper communications with your shareholders.



<!--[if !supportLists]-->1) <!--[endif]-->We’ll be talking to a number of research and clinical labs at ISBM 2008 and we expect to arrange several collaborations using the ELISA format.




<!--[if !supportLists]-->2) <!--[endif]-->The ELISA format will be commercialized directly by the company via smaller labs in other countries. We are well advanced in this initiative.






<!--[if !supportLists]-->3) <!--[endif]-->The ELISA format and the rapid tests are different things: The ELISA test is for clinical labs, it takes 3 hours to be done and it measures the amount of RECAF in serum with high precision. The rapid test is a qualitative test (yes/no), it is not as accurate, it can be done in a doctor’s office or a drug store for that matter and it takes less than 5 minutes. It requires a drop of blood taken from a finger.




<!--[if !supportLists]-->4) <!--[endif]-->The rapid tests should not cannibalize the clinical tests because they are not as accurate: Once a rapid test shows positive, RECAF needs to be measured and that requires a clinical assay, the same way a rapid pregnancy test is followed by a clinical test measuring HCG.



Dear Dr. Moro,

I have been a BOCX shareholder since 2003. You are right about the reason people are questioning BOCX investment is b/c of the 70% drop in shareprice in the last 3 months. I also own other investments (good companies) that also have touched 5 yr lows in shareprice and continue to hold to weather the storm.

My questions regarding BOCX are as follows:

1) How long do you expect the CASH that BOCX has on hand to last? (6 months?, 1 yr?)

We are entertaining and examining a number of private placements against restricted stock and we are confident that we’ll have them in place before we exhaust our funds.

We noticed a question from someone interested in making a private placement. We have been taking private placements since 2003 and therefore we would like to ask everyone interested in making one to contact us directly at [phone]. During my absence next week, Ms. Bold-de-Haughton will be able to provide information on the subject.

2) How will BOCX pay off the $3M it owes to Smithline next year? (cash infusion by 3rd licencee? revenues from Elisa test? Share dilution?)

The loans are now at $1.7M, not $3M. Whether we continue paying with cash or stock will depend on the market conditions, the amounts to be received from new licenses, revenues, private placements, etc.

3) In your opinion, is the fact that RECAF is a UNIVERSAL CANCER MARKER a positive or negative feature? Some people think it is a negative b/c recaf can only say if cancer is present and not WHERE it is in the body? Other's think it is a positive b/c other markers (PSA etc) only detect one type of cancer.

I have discussed this topic extensively in a previous response. Most of what I wrote was ignored by those interested in bashing the company. For example, I started by providing several examples – such as monitoring disease or monitoring therapy efficiency – in which having a single marker is much more practical than having a battery of them and where the site of the tumor is already know and therefore the argument is void. The size of the market for follow up, monitoring therapy and determining if a lump is malignant or benign is very large.




Stating that a broad spectrum cancer marker is a negative thing is akin to stating that using a thermometer is not good because if you have a fever it does not tell you where the infection is.




Finally, I made a legal argument: What would you do if you knew that there is a cancer marker available that was not used on you in your last clinical checkup because it cannot tell the source of the tumor (and therefore it would force spending money to confirm it and find the location) and now your cancer is so advanced that your chances of survival are very low? Assume for this mind experiment that you were among the 90% of cancer patients who are RECAF positive. It is likely that you would sue for malpractice. Now think of your reaction if after a RECAF test you are told you might have cancer and that further tests are required to discard that possibility. The tests are done (even at your own cost) and you are told it was a false alarm. Are you going to sue for mental distress or are you going to feel very relieved?

Has Biocurex considered investigating--or has ruminated on any postulates for investigating--why some cancers do not express RECAF?

While this is a very interesting question, it is to be answer in the realm of a pure research lab; our priority now is to take product to market and make money for our shareholders.

Is there anything about the origin and/or function of RECAF that tells us something new about cancer? Could this point to a possible adjunct test for early detection of "non-RECAF-cancer"?

I do not know the answer to this question and I am afraid the subject is too vast to speculate.

Is Biocurex aware of any research elsewhere that is studying this aspect?

No.




Dr. Moro,

The agreement with Inverness calls for quarterly summary reports to describe the progress of development. Assuming that these reports are being received from Inverness can you please update the shareholders on the progress made by Inverness to date?

Thank You.

7.3 Reports. Within ninety (90) days following the end of each quarter
during the term of this Agreement, Inverness shall prepare and deliver to
BioCurex a written summary report which shall describe (a) the research
performed to date employing the Licensed Materials and Technology, (b) the
progress of the development, and testing of Products in clinical trials, and (c)
the status of obtaining regulatory approvals to market Products.

Unfortunately we are under non-disclosure clauses and therefore all I can say at this point is that we are satisfied with the progress taking place. Inverness has paid so far $1M for rights to the RECAF tests and the project has a very high level of priory within their organization.


I am not sure if this will help us because we are not on a major exchange. Notice no comments or acknowledgement on the recent patent on THERAPEUTICS from the peanut gallery at IHub. Dr Moro, there is obvious manipulation of the share price to keep the price under .30 cents (that seems to be the magic number). I have seen that shares are sold below the ask all day long and they just reload to make sure the price does not rise. I know that you have addressed shareholders, and that you are aware of this, but your only solution is to pay off the loan. Do you see this being resolved before the end of this year? It would give any current or future shareholders more of a reason to add to their position.

We have noticed some unusual trading patterns but we cannot attribute them to any specific group or interest. We intend to pay off the loan as quickly as possible, with as little as possible dilution all the while keeping the company liquid. This is a balancing act that we have been able to maintain for the past 5 years and we plan on continue our policy even during the current very adverse market conditions


Are their three different Therapeutic Appications of (Anti Recaf) ? One for each of the AFP-L1,AFP-L2,AFP-L3. Or is one good for all three?Please explain Therapeutic Appications if your allowed to at this time. Thank you Dr.

AFP-L1 and RECAF have nothing to do with each other. AFP is a protein that binds to RECAF. They are 2 different substances. The L1, L2, etc are variants of the sugars AFP has attached. They have nothing to do with the sugars attached to RECAF. RECAF does not see a sugar; RECAF has a sugar that binds to AFP. Approximately 50% of ALL proteins have sugars attached.



Do you see Biocurex hiring key employess in the next three months to help with areas such as finance, sales and marketing, product development, to name a few, so you can free yourself to manage the more critical areas of Biocurex that need your expertise rather than managing all areas of the company as you do now.

Finance, sales and marketing ARE the most critical areas of BioCurex and that is where the CEO has to be involved with. As we move forward, we’ll need more people in sales and marketing and we’ll hire them as needed. However, it is worth noting that many companies are reducing their personnel in order to curtail costs.

Company: BioCurex
From: newbie21
Title: NATURE OF BUSINESS AND CONTINUANCE OF OPERATIONS

Body:

In this section of the lastest filing, you state your intentions to restructure the convertible notes payable into common stock. Do you still intend to convert the 1.9 million currently due into common stock?

The decision to convert or pay in cash depends on many circumstances such as share price, market conditions, funds availability and it needs to be made each month. So far, the company has paid in cash. The company is advancing on a number of fronts to secure funds. Some of these require no dilution or minimal dilution and they will eventually determine how the convertible notes are paid. The details of these deals cannot be disclosed at this time. It should be noted that since 2003, when Moro became CEO, to present, the company has never had a situation in which it could not meet its financial obligations.

Company: BioCurex
From: newbie21
Title: 416% effective interest rate

Body:

You have not responded to the accuracy of the effective interest rate of the loan being 416% so I suppose it is correct. Why did the company borrow 3 million at such a high effective interest rate and then just use the money to pay off the loan? If my figures are correct, the 3 million will be gone by the end of the year with about 1.5 million still owed. Why didn't the company just sell stock instead?

The 416% is an accounting atrocity emerging from the Black-Shole Pricng Model calculations introduced in the regulations to punish small issuers like us for the excesses of Enron and their kin. It can be tracked back to the S-1/A registration of 2008-04-28 (http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1... ) and it has to do with the arcane way of accounting for the warrants, etc. It is an atrocity because if we pay the notes with cash, the actual interest rate would be about 30% to 40% over the entire period. It is also an attack on common sense which dictates that an option or a warrant is NOT a loss until it is exercised. At least, one would expect that if a warrant is accounted as a loss, if it expires without being exercised, the loss would be recovered. That is not the case.

In closing, there is a great deal of unwarranted speculation about the future of our company, our ability to finance it and the commercialization of our technology. There is fear emerging from the general market conditions and from the systematic and repetitive comments of some individuals who have made a point in bashing us. That has driven the stock price down to levels that do not represent the price average of the past 2 years, that do not represent the unusual feat for a small company to be able to generate licensing agreements with two industry giants so far and more to come. Our current stock price does not represent the value of its technology or the fact that Abbott presented results at an international congress validating our own results. It does not represent the value of the accumulated investment that has resulted in a unique technology that can literally save lives and make BioCurex’ shareholders a significant profit in the process, as has already being the case several times before in our history.

Fear will pass; it always does because it relates to a negative emotion that feeds on itself rather than to reality and things will then come back to normal. A summary look at what this company has achieved with less than $10M in total cash investment gives an idea of our reality

He answered EVERYTHING. NO HOLDS BARRED. In other words he was truthful and did not dance around the pressing issues.