Replies to post #380234 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[WolfofMia]

So many ways to dismantle and present the data, yet unknowns are still unknowns.

Starting to look and sound like Dr.M rehashing old stuff over and over again.

Cant wait for new data.

[powerwalker]

Thanks, Investor, for sharing your "fun" work.

Are you sure who is in the Group 1 and 2 are the "Strong Responders"? The reason I ask is if Group 1 is those two you identified, from the table their total change of ADCS should equate to 8 as both had a change of 4 w/zero deviation. Looking at the graph, 2006 might have gained 3 at Week 109 while 1011 may have lost 2 by then. Similar situation for the Group 2 folks if they represent the "Strong Responders". Table and graph don't seem to align.

Using the graph, except for 1013, each participant of the SR stayed at baseline through 109 weeks for ADCS, plus or minus 2 or 3 points whereas SOC has an almost ~19 point loss.

More data from Anavex and TGD to cause head scratching.

Off to Mass to prayer for Alzheimer's victims and their families and, of course, researchers seeking cures and remedies.

Have a great day, Investor!


ANAVEX NOW ... RIGHT NOW ... MONO-STYLE ... for LIFE ... and for ALL AGES!!!

[TempePhil]

Investor, Group1 patients were 1014 and 2006, according to Doc328 findings .
See his post 358446 of April 26 2022 at 11:09AM, investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=168662278

At the time I confirmed these two (1014 and 2006) on my own.

Your findings of 1011 being a Group1 patient does not make sense as one of the Group1 requirements was defined as being High Mean Concentration. Whereas 1011, as you say, "1011 had next to no concentration".

Whatsay?