sulaco, I follow what you are saying. Allow me however to comment on the word "magnetism" when it comes to Phosphatidylserine.
I can agree that on a site where there are two different electric potentials there is an electric field between the different amounts of charge which we more commonly call a voltage. In cells that can be between likely and oppositely charged cells or cell parts. A potential difference between 2 negatively or 2 positive charged areas cause charge repulsion, and when the charges are opposite they attract.
But to have a MAGNETIC FIELD (which is of a different nature then electric fields) you NEED charge in motion. Permanent magnets, the magnetic field around an electric wire (when current flows thought it) with which we can make electromagnets, as well as ANY charged substance/object in MOTION generates a magnetic field. On permanent magnets we know today that electrons move in small area's, called Weiss domains, and the when we align with an external electric field then we may in some composed material create a permanent magnetic field because the electrons are in a state where they never get charged balance and continuously keep moving (kind of arena circles) and maintain a magnetic field.
When flippase releases PS and scramblase catalyzes the rapid exchange of phosphatidylserine (the flipping) the inside out THEN the PS mainly remains on the cell surface. Forget a moment about microvesicles because the PS on their might or might not be charged depending on how it is bound in the MS.
Cancer cells (of solid cancers of course) do not move (float in the bloodstream). The are part of a tumor and without motion. Hence the fact that PS has a negatively charged channel does NOT allow that negative charge to create a magnetic field (for that the cell need to move and then you have charge in motion).
So I would say that motionless substances in the body can have electric fields if they are charge, and only if they are charged, and that they do NOT have a magnetic field because they are motionless.
It is of course different for immune system cells that float in the bloodstream. Their polarity (if applicable) will through attraction/repulsion allow them to interact with other cells in the blood and with walls of externalised PS (mainly endothelial). That will also be a mains to help or resist other types of binding such as with the proteins in receptors. You need to come within a certain perimeter for the binding to take place.
The polarisation of macrophages will therefor allow them or keep them from approaching the cancer cells depending on whether they can approach the PS or not. And if for instance T-cell cannot approach the PS on the surface of a cell THEN those T-Cells can also not bind with OTHER cell markers (ligands). Eg. PD-L1 (cell side) and PD-1 (T-cell receptor side) binding can not take place if the T-cell is kept at a distance by charge repulsion.
Bavituximab gets in between in a double way. PS masking and FX-gamma binding and that drastically changes the tumor environment. Neutralising the PS "eat me, I am in a natural cell death cycle" signal then translates in "their is something wrong, attack" signal. AIMO.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
