InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

sentiment_stocks

06/26/14 11:02 AM

#14715 RE: flipper44 #14713

All true statements. Especially find this one interesting:

The PRs avoid discriminatory dissemination of trial data which large institutions are excellent at obtaining.

[color=red][/color]


Budzar is the one who got "slapped" - we just didn't get to witness that spanking!
icon url

PacificNW

06/26/14 11:06 AM

#14717 RE: flipper44 #14713

Agreed and it is amazing to me how some here thing that NWBO is in the wrong by releasing data early in the trial or that it was wrong for shareholders to have voiced their complaints to AF & MS & the Dr. They were in the wrong, although one could say that AF was doing his job, but MD & the Dr weren't. It is as simple as that nothing more nothing less. Just because MD is where the trial is taking place has nothing to do with it, it isn't theirs to announce or comment on. They are bystanders in the reporting of results of NWBO's trial. I personally believe that whether the Dr didn't it on his own or with MD's blessing makes no difference, it shouldn't have happened and AF just got lucky and was smart to use it for sure because that is what he does but it was obviously another twisted story line, over the top and with out merit. Anyone who listens hard enough should be able to see through this bs and realize what is going on here.
icon url

barnstormer

06/26/14 11:17 AM

#14719 RE: flipper44 #14713

No argument with any of that. However the reality is that MDA is the big dog with the big microphone (mixed metaphor?) in this argument, and right or wrong, it's in NWBO's best interest to work out something with MDA to eliminate or minimize distractions from any future PRs or case data releases.