News Focus
News Focus
icon url

GoodGuyBill

05/15/25 1:18 AM

#767812 RE: jesster64 #767798

Well, I did state, "Of course, all of this remains speculation." But I don’t believe this is an "insane leap". King Charles was diagnosed with cancer in 2024, yet prior to this:

-- NWBO submitted its MAA to the MHRA in December 2023.
-- NYAS and JAMA Oncology had already peer-reviewed the Phase III trial data.
-- The NHS likely monitored emerging clinical data, especially for treatments addressing serious unmet needs like glioblastoma and cancer.
-- NWBO treated patients via compassionate use cases, meaning the NHS would have had direct exposure to real-world efficacy data well before the MAA submission.

Additionally, it’s reasonable to believe early engagements between NWBO and NICE took place, allowing the NHS access to DCVax-L’s efficacy data well in advance of NWBO’s formal MAA submission. Why? Because in December 2022—two years BEFORE King Charles’s diagnosis—NICE began its appraisal of DCVax-L for glioblastoma.

Given all this, I can’t definitively say King Charles influenced NHS’s decision to place DCVax-L on the HCD list, nor can I assess the probability of it. But I can say, with confidence, that it remains a possibility—one rooted in reasonable speculation rather than baseless conjecture.
icon url

biosectinvestor

05/15/25 2:09 AM

#767815 RE: jesster64 #767798

I am just coming to this, but DCVax-L is quite obscure, such photos do not drop into such high profile stories by accident. Newspapers and journalists do that when they know things that are not public and that they effectively cannot report. Granted, for posters to write a lot on the subject is speculative, but not without some reasonable degree of potential to be true. 
There are not a bunch of partisan journalists looking for random opportunities to drop DCVax-L images into random "cancer" articles and that typically does not happen. It takes some thought and hunting and selection. And such photos are not necessarily available without licensing. So speculative, yes, without basis, not if they are sneaking in photos of DCVax-L in articles. A lot of times, journalists know more than they can say.  Reasonable speculation, assuming such articles with such images exist. But speculation it is.