News Focus
News Focus
icon url

FeMike

02/11/25 12:34 PM

#748746 RE: flipper44 #748730

Oh Flip. Not again, buddy. You really need to stop lying to try to prove your point.

Let's try to work through your bullshit stepwise and see where we end up.

FeMike first reaction post.

Six months from approval.

FeMike second reaction post

Four months from approval.



Wrong, as usual. Yes, my off the cuff first reaction post was a 6 monthish minimum estimate. However, you were mistaken (not mistaken, just intentionally lying) to say that I changed that to 4 months. I listed a series of facts to show potential timelines that would prove that NICE pricing would not be set immediately upon approval, which is indeed what DocLee said (we'll get to that later). The first fact I showed was Linda's statement, which would factually put the timeline according to her as 4 months from an imminent approval. That is not what I contested, though. Just what Linda contested.

My follow-up facts showed 6 months (point 2) and 7 months (point 3). Please finish reading my post to find the summation of the facts I laid and, thus, my 'second reaction'.

We are, as a matter of fact, no closer than 7 months from NICE guidance from the date of approval.



Second lie you made to try to prove your point:

Anyway, that wasn’t answering Doc Lee’s original comment. His comment is that he’d be extremely disappointed if she hasn’t been addressing price with NICE.


Again, and as usual, incorrect. His original comment was:

I fully expect management to be working their socks off behind the scenes to launch DCVax-L onto the medical profession and into the public gaze as soon as the MHRA gives its approval.

A vital part of that scenario is that a treatment price acceptable to NICE will have already been negotiated.


He said that management needs to have pricing already negotiated and completed AS SOON AS MHRA GIVES ITS APPROVAL. He did not say, as you allege, that he would be disappointed if she hasn't been addressing it. He said that his faith in them would be destroyed if she didn't have pricing done by MHRA approval.

But regardless of that, your comments is still misleading and intentionally off base:

Anyway, that wasn’t answering Doc Lee’s original comment.


You're right, my timeline wasn't answering his original comment. My timeline was directly answering his followup comment, which was a request for me to back up my 6 month claim with facts, which is exactly what I did.

FeMike: Please explain factually and clearly why NICE reimbursement won't happen for at least 6 months?



As usual, you can't contest anything I said or say I was wrong about anything, so you simply make up bull shit lies to try to get people to look at a different birdy.

The point of the entire thread is my trying to inform people that we are not close (>6 months away from) a NICE/NHS reimbursement for DCVax-L. That's not bashing, it's not knocking the company, it's just a knowledge of how this process works and I'm trying to educate people on this, instead of just pumping up "Oh yeh, approval and NICE recommendation will happen at the same time! wooo pump Linda!!" Agree or disagree? No strawmen, it's that simple. I'm sure you agree with me, we are still 6 months away, but you can't say it because....well, FeMike can't be right and Flip can't be wrong.

Do better, Flip. Do better.