Replies to post #329045 on Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[roiresearch]

from my experience, it's about 30 days from a pre-ind PR to an ind PR

There looks to be another 1-2 weeks before an FDA update. I hope at that time brilacidin has study #5 show up on the fda clinical trials list

if it unfolds, i would expect a pretty decent pop but will be followed by an update in regards to the shelf offering. so far, it would seem as if investors are baggage that come along with running a public company imho

[Justfactsmam]

IN RESPONSE TO POST cited below, it is important to discern the difference between "fact" and drawing "false conclusion" based upon "false premises" or "false assumptions"

Every investor must be discerning about Posts using an event or non-event as "facts" and setting up "strawman" to "knockdown" thereby creating false conclusions and/or doubt, attributable to that "fact" used knockdown and create appearances of IPIX failure. 

What are the the real facts here?

"Can the company go another day without news? At some point it begins to feel like there is a real problem instead of a real huge bonus surprise. Why no data? Starting to wonder. If we cannot see data how will they persuade the FDA? Weird that they have nothing to say."

1.  "Can the company go another day without news?"

STRAWMAN..."NEWS WAS DUE" 
KNOCKDOWN...THE COMPANY HAS NEWS OR SHOULD HAVE NEWS TO REPORT AND ISN'T"...there is a Problem!" 

No news? SO WHAT!...would investors like "fake" or "fluff"  news to satisfy impatience?  News comes out when there are new events which  in management's view, support the material progress or failure of company's progress...ie  "news"...eg pre-print peer review articles, more optional RBL Brilacidin test results, IND designation by FDA , grant funding, test site designation and selections, etc. etc. etc. 

 
2.  "At some point it begins to feel like there is a real problem instead of a real huge bonus surprise." 
 
STRAWMAN..."IND and/or PEER REVEIW ARTICLES ARE OVERDUE!"
KNOCKDOWN..."THERE IS A PROBLEM"..."THE FDA IND APPROVAL AND PEER REVIEW WERE DUE AND HAVE NOT BEEN ISSUED, THEREFORE  READER SHOULD PRESUME THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH IND DESIGNATION AND THE PEER REVIEW IS GOING TO BE  NEGATIVE" 
 
Post implies FDA response to IND application and/or  Peer Review Articles  are overdue.  Waiting for FDA bureaucracy to respond.  There is no basis for "feeling" that there is a problem.  Poster making up his own deadlines...Why should we expect NEWS BEFORE FDA is required to report? (60 days from submission...we are 20 days out...but IMO we will receive 1st week of Nov.) Response to IND approval is not in the control of IPIX.


3.  "Why no data?"

STRAWMAN: Data is required to be released by Company or RBL as soon as it is available. 
KNOCKDOWN:  No Data = Data is not good or there is a problem with it. 

Post ignores that RBL owns the data and dictates when it can be released.  Since RBL is writing a Peer Review article on the successes of Brilacidin, as a matter of course, DATA is not released until the pre-print Peer Review article is released.  The Data will be explained by originator of that data, i.e. RBL and not left to wild assumptions by those who are ignorant to the process.  There is no negative assumption to be made by non-release...simply SOP for researcher who is writing an article based upon the data.
 
4.  "If we cannot see data how will they persuade the FDA?"

STRAWMAN: FDA did not receive the Data in IND application.
KNOCKDOWN: FDA will not be persuaded and will reject IND
application. 

5.  "Weird that they have nothing to say."

STRAWMAN: FDA and/or RBL were due to report something.
KNOCKDOWN: FDA and/or RBL failure to report something = Failure.

False implication again as explained above!