Replies to post #676705 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[User-840664]

All the best to you

[Kap10jak]

I thought you were just nipping in to warn us. Seems like you're over extending your nip.

[learningcurve2020]

I understand. Do you believe JAMA did their dd in terms of the same issue? I'm guessing not.

[georgebailey]

Talk about yer word salads, new level here.

[Bright Boy]

Hey Nemesis,

I suggest that you save the best for your last post, "The sky is falling!!"

Cheers,

BB

PS: But don't quit too soon, your posts are very entertaining and they might find their way into thee nest "Frankenstein" sequel!!! You know, you're the guy that's strolling alone on a dark, foggy and rainy night on a cobblestone street in London and is captured by the lab assustants/goons and whisked away to become the next experiment/model in building the monster that actually "comes to life" after a series of lightening bolts. My suggestion to you is that rather than post your story on Ihub, you should take it to Al Musella or UCLA or Brain Tumor Foundation or ....... and see what they say. I assure you that the RA's in the UK don't waste their time on "Crack pots" !!! What I'm really surprised about is that all your claims haven't been picked up by AF and plastered on the front page of Statnews!!!!

[Springbok80]

What patient?

[Springbok80]

But you were never enrolled in the trial...your words.

[sentiment_stocks]

I'm glad to read that you're doing so well... IMO, you're lucky and there are many other GBM patients that would love to be in your shoes.


What I don't understand, or perhaps this is not what you are meaning, is why your experience, which did not involve DCVax-L, would be pertinent to the upcoming CHM meeting re: DCVax-L. Could you give us any detail on that? Or is the CHM just interested in hearing from GBM patients that have lived past 5 years?

[FeMike]

Obviously, ahead of any regulatory determination, as to the veracity of my lengthy receipted testimony, I cannot expend my carefully considered comments further.

Fortunately, the scheduled CHM meeting, created a natural pinch-point in the Process of the Regulators’ Investigations into my claims.

Which meant that now they were in receipt of detailed, pertinent patient testimony ahead of meeting, they had a statutory obligation to consider it.

Nem,

Now that your carefully considered comments have been evaluated during the CHM which was a natural pinch point, care to elaborate on these detailed, pertinent patient testimony you provided?

You basically guaranteed the CHM would review and deny the application at the March meeting, which clearly didn't happen, so what's going on with your bogus allegations?

Thanks in advance for your non-response.