News Focus
News Focus
icon url

XenaLives

02/14/17 3:30 AM

#699 RE: blu_1 #698

Even six months isn't long enough for safety in CNS, but three months is absurd. Many of the drugs that are currently approved in this area have longer term side effects. Can anyone with more knowledge of the biochemistry side of things explain why Bryostatin would not have the long term side effect issues of other IGF drugs?

icon url

runncoach

02/14/17 6:53 AM

#705 RE: blu_1 #698

You're right, its starting to seem we will likely see very good results in 6+ weeks. We'll also likely partner or be bought out by big pharma to move the next trials ahead as expediently as possible IMO. Maybe it will take some time for all to be convinced... as it should.

You're also right that billions in investment in this space has been mostly a failure, but they've put their money on the wrong horse. They gambled on the symptom (plaques) and not the potential root cause. I would rather have some play money on a new promising approach, than continue to beat my head against a wall trying to find the best way to remove plaques.

I was reading some posts on a competing ALZ drug a couple days ago and folks were ecstatic about a few examples of patients increasing their "scores" 2-5 points and how amazing it was and how nobody else could do that. Then I saw our results from the compassionate use and felt a lot better about this gamble than others.

JMHO