“Who cares what you say”? You are an ignorant poster not providing links to your own assertions giving an alternative definition of established medicine in your last sentence.
Who cares what you say? You have lost all credibility - not that it says much - insisting on supporting a lost cause, that ATL-DC is not DCVax-L in UCLA's two combo trials with poly-iclc and Keytruda even though we now have around 20 solid sources corroborating that it is.
That puts you in the pole position of the Laughing Stock Car Race
I tend to agree with you on this one although I see where there might be some wiggle room that flipper44 points to. I accept established as something approved rather than investigational since there is no further clarification to include investigational therapies in the definition of what might be commonly understood to be “established”. The issue is that your constant attempts to separate/distinguish autologous DC (ATL DC) from DCVax-L which is now known as murcidencel as the commercially available version is silly. There are always tweaks along the way and NWBO has the patent right to sell the commercial product that comes from the same identified base product as ATL DC. This begs a bigger question. What does sameness really mean when it comes to DC treatments? I think Linda knows very well and you want folks confused about it; ). Many longs may end up surprised themselves. Best wishes.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
