News Focus
News Focus
icon url

vator

01/01/26 9:56 AM

#806087 RE: seekinganswers #806076

Thanks for posting. We own the rights to the UCLA formula and improvements. We own all the prior patent art as well. Dig up the contract from years ago. Educate yourself.
icon url

EMHLondonUK

01/01/26 10:06 AM

#806091 RE: seekinganswers #806076

Seeking... this is verifiably false. In 2022, Dr Liau was asked "is ATL-DC the same thing as DCVax?"  Her answer, 
"DCVax-L is a trade name that is actually licensed by Northwest Biotherapeutics... Yes, we developed the process. At UCLA."
icon url

The Danish Dude

01/01/26 10:49 AM

#806109 RE: seekinganswers #806076

ATL-DC bullshit that never happened for $500



From this Nature article:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-48073-y



DCVax-L is the commercially branded version of UCLAs ATL-DC. There is one and only one ATL-DC used by UCLA. And NWBO has the commercial rights.

You keep forgetting that there is an article out there where in print Dr. Liau says that NWBO took her formula and tweaked it to call it their own.
- learningcurve2020



That’s quite bold LC considering the dozens of proof that states the opposite, that has been put forward by UCLA in terms of Nature results article, UCLA articles, verbally stated by UCLA doctors, stated by Linda Liau in webinar with Al Musella in 2022, in slides at several Linda Liau seminars.

How come you keep forgetting that?

Can you enlighten us about your incentive to stay voluntarily in the dark for years on this topic in particular?

The outcome may be the same but the process was tweaked so NWBO could call it their own. Why is this so hard? Tell you what, write LP to please put a clear explanation up on their website so we can all finally call it a day on this topic.
- learningcurve2020



It is clear but only to those, who are invested in NWBO. Not the uninvested segment.

How might that be?