InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

iwasadiver

08/13/19 2:13 PM

#239583 RE: exwannabe #239582

You have no clue as to what anyone did or did not offer.

The fact is that NWBO didn’t have the means or personnel to take on a trial that didn’t have the potential impact that L will have. They may have had big ideas at the time but those ideas had to be tempered given what occurred with the L trial. This is old news that has nothing to do with anything. How many treatments has Big Pharma shelved over the years? Non story, as usual
icon url

Doc logic

08/13/19 2:34 PM

#239585 RE: exwannabe #239582

exwannabe,

I think most patent questions have been answered reasonably in the past. If the question you refer to is about Jerry's protective custody of certain patents then the rather obvious answer is that it is kept untouchable for a good reason and in the hands of a long term friendly. If that scares some investors I suggest they do a little more personal and unbiased due diligence instead of take anyone's word or opinion about it from this board. Best wishes.
icon url

longfellow95

08/13/19 2:50 PM

#239587 RE: exwannabe #239582

If they had gone with prostate, there would be a chorus of 'why did they shelve DCVaxBrain'.
It's quite simple; they opted for GBM.
Photonics remarks are bang on the money, as far as I'm concerned.

Didn't know you did pie in the sky valuations, by the way.
icon url

trocprofit

08/13/19 3:14 PM

#239595 RE: exwannabe #239582

I was told that they went with GBM first because they thought it would be faster. 16 month death snetence for GBM vs. multi-year survival for prostate. And, here we are years later still in the GBM trial....a good sign IMO.
icon url

Extremist223

08/13/19 3:22 PM

#239599 RE: exwannabe #239582

nwbo didnt want to be improved provenge and certainly didnt want the public to confuse a completely personalized therapy to a prostate targeted therapy.