Replies to post #185932 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[jtsmgoblue]

Connecting the dots is all well and good and may give some a warm, fuzzy about the company but is immaterial to the binary trial results. Reality is drug works or it doesn’t. Time and patience needed for trials to deliver results that company can share. Up to that time, everything else is speculation and it’s apparent there are a few camps / positions. Frankly, MMs are managing the share price game. Longs holding through results and interim updates, traders swinging for the fences, shorts relying on past trials, nefarious instys/HF relying on impatience and emotion. Right or wrong, market cap by any reasonable measure is undervalued vs any historical measure. So, no matter your perspective, play the game and attempt to exploit your perspective. One year from today we will all know what position triumphed and the company will have connected the dots for us and populated the graphic with supporting documentation.

Long!

[georgejjl]

nidan7500, I agree 100%

On the dot connection theory, is it possible/likely that the apparently accelerated (reported on Spanish news) PDD trial enlistment schedule is related to positive feedback from patients in trials. Good news is hard to come by in PDD community. So, people hear good news and are in a hurry to get signed up. IMO, this may be what we are witnessing. And TRUST ME, this kind of thing cuts both ways in technology driven, bad news travels even faster.

IMO, the system is telling us there is evidence A2-73 PDD works. When WS figures out how to read this kind of news it will get off the trial menu and get into the real world. But, many have still not figured out that the FDA has shat the CNS disease bed.

Good luck and GOD bless,

[Steady_T]

But, many have still not figured out that the FDA has shat the CNS disease bed.

I have to take issue with this statement. The FDA doesn't direct research. They tell the companies how they need to go about proving the research that Pharma wants to turn into a marketable drug.

Pharma decides what avenues for research it wants to pursue. The FDA doesn't tell them what to pursue. The whole plaque research program was undertaken because, at the time, the understanding of AD was limited and plaque was the most obvious target to go after. The tools available for diagnosing AD and for measuring AD severity were very limited. And for that matter are still pretty limited. There has been progress made in diagnostic tools and in measuring tools. The recent FDA guidelines make it quite clear that the tools are still inadequate. This has only been made clear because of the recent series of AD trial failures.

The number of failed trials had little to do with the FDA. The failures were because of a lack of understanding of Alzheimer's disease by the entire medical establishment. That lack of understanding is not anybodies fault, it is a reflection of the state of research into AD causes and pathology.

Anavex is pursuing a different direction in the understanding and treatment of AD and other CNS diseases. If and when 2-73 is shown to have the positive effects we all expect, it will be a major step forward in the understanding of AD and CNS diseases in general. Till then the understanding of AD is in limbo. It is no body's fault.