Replies to post #105967 on Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[muelch]

While I agree with your frustration to an extent, the breakdown of cancer types wasn't the worst bit of information on the poster. There's a few different things you could read into the skewed ovarian numbers if you were so inclined.

As much as investors like to receive minute by minute updates, I applaud taking a more scientific approach and releasing data once the trial is actually done. The only thing I don't agree with is horrible timeline estimates or over promising. E.g. promising p21 results for literally 2 years and then at the last minute deciding to hold most of it back, or taking abnormally long with the Nasdaq application without indicating why. The latter may simply be due to getting the independent directors squared away, most companies have this in place before beginning the uplist process.

[frrol]

Infinity the 9 years is not the range it is the SE of the sample population, hope that helps

[MinnieM]

Simplified view of the ASCO 2015 poster.

The human info published is validating the previous published animal studies. This poster simply validates that Kevetrin appears to be working in humans the same as in animals.

The human clinicals appear to have the same results as the preclinicals.

That validation is huge. So, yes, it is new information.