Replies to post #105643 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[falconer66a]

Clueless regarding the hard science.

[nidan7500]

Skan...Saw that, pathetic analysis and reasoning. Bottom line he claims..."It's just too hard". So every patient with a CNS disease is just supposed to "suck it up" and say goodbye. You tell that to the little girl with Retts..... axxhole.

The author says AVXL is too small, no one has ever survived, there is not enough money in the universe to help AVXL, the trial they did is no good ...blah, blah.

I offer this article as evidence that some people will do anything for a few bucks.

[nobrainerstocks]

Amit WHO?

[rocalinda]

New hit piece

And here some of the responses to the author, who is clearly clueless about all that is happening with Anavex:

----
BostonRedSox67:
Amit, your article appears to be rational, and a reflection of your own opinion, and not a commissioned hit piece via authors unknown.
I note two references in your article that give me pause
One, you reference Adam F, who beats small biotechs to death all the time, at the behest of his masters, who probably are BP and the like, and the shorting Cabal. Adam F stopped beating AVXLS brains out recently, IMO he was told to cool it by the SEC, in any event, to use him as an example of someone who has spoken poorly about AVXL does not work to help your article, it does the obverse,
Two, when you say AVXL is "apparently" not a scam, that damning with faint praise conceit, which smells like the early articles when AVXL was starting, again enormously detracts from your thesis, and to be honest, your veracity. AVXL" scam" comments , which were ALWAYS PERNICIOUS and based on nothing but the desire to spread FUD, were put to sleep along time ago, when the Michael J Fox Society, The Retts Foundation, and the FDA starting working with and giving counsel, and monies to AVXL. You should also note thatthe Insitutitonal investors confidence, which stood at 1% 18 months is now at 22% and growing. Conclusion NOT A SCAM CONCLUSIVELY NOT APPARENTLY.
This use of the Apparently Not A Scam, really leaves a bad taste in my mind's mouth, and has a tendency to lead my to lose interest at all in any words that follow.
Shame, because on the face of it, you appear to be a reasonable author who states your own opinion.
I guess I would ask you to remove the Apparently Not A Scam,and replace it with either striking that passage, or saying, I apologize for my poetic liscence, and will state that AVXL is NOT a scam.
Thanks for listening
---
mprush:
Well said! Any article referencing Adam F can't be taken seriously in my books. The guy has absolutely no science background and has a long history of playing dirty...definitely not someone I would want to be associated with
----
honeymoonerz:
The article AF wrote that you reference is riddled with issues as well. First off, when you reference a "Similar Mechanism" with reference to a trial of similar patients, in this case Mild to moderate ALZ, than the implication is the compounds are similar because the patient population is a constant. Therefore that phrase is a fallacy and extremely misleading. in fact those phrases indicate there is a patent issued to Toyama and not to Anavex for this same formula.
Additionally, AF's article states "Anavex says Anavex 2-73 increased MMSE scores by an average of 1.5 points in five weeks. MMSE is a standard test of cognition with higher numbers representing improvement." Alzheimers is a progressive disease. That means it "progresses" over time and gets worse. In moderate ALZ, congnition is measured in weeks and has been noted in numerous studies to have progressed significantly in 5 weeks. The fact that there might be a compound that stops progression and in this case improves it is UNREAL. I hope, just as you stated, this is real for all our sake.
In my opinion, your entire scientific basis for this article rests on referencing of others who also are not in the medical field. It's a very risky and misleading approach. Perhaps you should spend more time researching the disease in question and formulate you're own conclusion based on the data as opposed to borrowing it
----
Hesmenssic:
32+ Reasons why I am LONG AVXL (or should I title it 32+ ways shorts could get crushed in AVXL)
Anavex Life Sciences: Future Catalysts
1a. ALZ outside funding/partnership
1b. Breakthrough Therapy Designation for A 2–73
1c. Fast Track Approval for A 2-73 in Alzheimer's
1d. PR regarding the start of P2/3 ALZ and first patient enrolled
2. Update on the Material Transfer Agreement with Biogen
3a. Start of Rett Syndrome P2 with first patient enrolled (slightly bigger catalyst if a pivotal p2)
3b. P2 Rett Syndrome Enrollment Completed or Halted Early
3c. Positive P2 Rett Syndrome Trial Results
3d. FDA Approval for A 2-73 in Rett Syndrome
4a. IND Approval for A 3–71
4b. Outside funding/partner for A 3–71 Phase 1
4c. Start of A 3–71 Phase 1
5a. IND Approval for Fragile X — Autism
5b. Outside funding/partner for P2 in Fragile X — Autism
6a. IND Approval for Infantile Spasms
6b. Outside funding/partner for P2 in Infantile Spasms
6c. Start of Infantile Spasms P2
7a. IND Approval for Parkinson’s
7b. Outside funding/partner for P2 in Parkinson’s (possibly including, but not limited to the Michael J. Fox Foundation)
7c. Start of Parkinson’s P2 with first patient enrolled
8a. IND Approval for Epilepsy
8b. Outside funding/partner for P2 in Epilepsy
8c. Start of Parkinson’s P2 with first patient enrolled
9a. IND approval for MS
9b. Outside funding/partner for P2 in MS
9c. Start of MS P2
10. More longitudinal data from ALZ P2 extension study
11. Start of clinical trials for Anavex 1066
12. Patent Expansion
13. IND for Non-Disclosed Indication
14. ODD for other indications
15. Increased institutional investing

[attilathehunt]

So he thinks he can make $4 if it hits his 75m MC. How short is he? 100 shares? He was digging, going back many years, attempting to boast his reason for being short.

One way to prove him wrong is to release some good data. We are overdue. Now would be a perfect time. Let's see the 15 and 18 month data.

[amstocks82]

s

eeking alpha - Anavex Life Sciences: 5 Reasons Why I'm Short

I always like to read these articles to see if there is something new to learn.

Checking the author's summary:

Anavex is trying to cure an intractable disease, and its competitors are formidable.

Anavex's trials have been too small to attach any efficacy significance.

Moreover its data has been inconsistent, shedding doubt on the science itself.

The first thing to notice is that the authors summary is not logical. The subject of the article is 5 reasons he is short. Why short a company that is trying to cure a disease that is "intractable"? There are many diseases which were once "intractable" but are now cured. The cure for some came from individuals or small companies. He is also wrong about the data being inconsistent. Further down I notice he writes
about this further but he does not understand the data. His use of "shedding doubt" does not mean what he thought it did. He probably meant, "casting doubt". The fact that he had that mistake in his opening summary in a blog he published indicates the author is not well educated or at least not well educated in English.

The author then writes:

Earlier articles from other sources were much more negative, including this article at Medium, and this article from Adam Feuerstein.

Those other blogs were not written by people who understand the science. From a science perspective, they were irrelevant.

Getting to the reasoning:

1. Alzheimer's is a Notoriously Hard Disease to Treat

Billions of dollars have been spent by companies such as Merck (NYSE:MRK), Eli Lilly (NYSE:LLY), Pfizer (NYSE:PFE) and Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) in failed Phase III drug trials intended to treat Alzheimer's. Merck's Verubecestat failed in a 2,200 patient trial while Lilly's solanezumab failed both in a wider set of patients in 2012 and in a subset of 2,100 patients with milder symptoms in 2016. ...

He should have left reason 1 as short and sweet. Essentially, many have tried to create a drug to cure Alzheimer's disease and no one has created anything very effective.

That is a good point and a reason to be skeptical. However, he goes on in more detail and gets the details wrong.

amyloid hypothesis" which as the FT article explains "holds that a protein known as beta-amyloid ..

He meant the Amyloid Beta peptide.

Next, he quoted Dr. Lon Schneider, director of the California Alzheimer's Disease Center at the University of Southern California.

There's so much going on, and as the brain is failing or dying, it is dying on all levels.

He thought the above was bad for Anavex but the opposite is true. The idea behind Anavex2-73 is to bring the brain back to "homeostasis". It is the only drug so far that works in a manner that works on many levels. Instead of targeting one thing, it works on multiple levels.

2. The Competition is Formidable...
A Japanese drug company, Toyama Chemical, is developing an Alzheimer's drug with the same sigma-1 receptor mechanism of action as Anavex's Anavex 2-73. Two years ago, Toyama reported results from a randomized, placebo-controlled phase IIa study enrolling 370 Alzheimer's patients.

The results were disappointing: Toyama's drug, T-817MA, failed to demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in memory, cognition or activities of daily living compared to placebo during the 52 weeks of the study.

The author apparently didn't know that Toyama's drug while working as a sigma-1 receptor agonist is still not the same as Anavex2-73. Donepezil the most common Alzheimer's drug is in a part a sigma-1 receptor agonist. Yet it has a different mechanism of action to Anavex2-73, T-817MA or cocaine which is also a sigma-1 receptor agonist. The method of action of the sigma-1 receptor agonist is dependent on the chemistry of the agonist. Each one is different so works differently.

I could go to debunk the other authors points but am out of time.

The author of the blog does not appear to have taken the time to learn about this subject. He does not know very much about anavex2-73 or the state of the current research on Alzheimer's disease otherwise he would not have made so many simple mistakes.