News Focus
News Focus
icon url

ilovetech

02/03/25 10:13 AM

#747183 RE: ccie1024 #747149

ccie1024 - A better question to ask the captured agency is this - How much is the MHRA getting paid to blow baseless hot air platitudes about mRNA to placate its masters? How much to insult the intelligence of the public, even while knowing, that Merck recently terminated three separate cancer indication trials, WHY, because "ALL PATIENTS DIED." The corruption is so deafeningly out in the open, that it clearly demonstrates what these corrupt tools think about the public at large.
icon url

mike00h

02/03/25 10:14 AM

#747185 RE: ccie1024 #747149

Hmmm...Anyone think they wanted to publish those guidelines before they authorized DCVax-L?
Bullish
Bullish
icon url

H2R

02/03/25 10:35 AM

#747193 RE: ccie1024 #747149

Is this a new hurdle?

I am a bit jaded when it comes to BP + RAs. This sentence, in particular, does not sit well with me:

Because these treatments are tailored to an individual’s tumour, they pose unique scientific questions on how they should be regulated.



nor does this one:

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has today launched a consultation on regulatory guidance for individualised mRNA cancer immunotherapies (colloquially referred to as cancer vaccines).

Why mRNA specifically? What 'regulatory guidance'?

Or

The eight-week consultation was launched today and will run until 31 March 2025. The MHRA is asking all stakeholders, including developers of these medicines, to provide comments, after which the guidance will be updated.



I did not find much info on Julian Beach. His bio on MHRA is empty.

Is this yet another attempt to side line NWBO? I've been invested since 2013, I've seen all kinds of attacks on the Company. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.
I can't wait for the MHRA approval to put those behind us.

Best of luck to Patients, NWBO, and Longs!