Replies to post #433833 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[The Danish Dude]

Deja vu :-d

[biosectinvestor]

You really should not discuss the law. Subtleties are not a strong point in these discussions. I doubt they have “violated” the law but I won’t get sucked down into a useless discussion of the specificities and niceties here. It’s waste of time.

There is a regular habit of people saying they are long and then conceding that the company is in violation of law. There are often very specific exceptions and specific reasons why some things do not apply that are likely not in the public set of facts. But there are related details in the laws and there are things that likely occur that can make things people presume to be true on bulletin boards simply untrue.

“Conceding” they are in violation of law is not a factual thing. No one knows. There are rules related to these things, they seem like they might be firm, but they are not necessarily what they seem to be, most of the time. Anyone who ever deals with regulations and law knows this to be the case, there are ambiguities, grays and factual unknowns that make such determinations not possible from our vantage point. Might be, but conceding it is not necessary because no one knows. Yes, rules say x, one can use Google to quote them, but that is not the same as knowing reality.

[exwannabe]

On your three points:

1) Saying that NWBO's failure in general to not update the US clinical trial registry is not the subject is odd. The issue being asserted is if NWBO is required to update it. I know they do not.

2) Is about "primary completion date", not results submission. They are unrelated. The primary completion date was known months prior to Oct 5, 2020. This was a required update in one month having nothing to do with results submission.

3) This one can be argued. But the protocol change was publicly known to patients. Does that count as communicated?