News Focus
News Focus
icon url

EMHLondonUK

01/01/26 12:27 PM

#806191 RE: exwannabe #806190

I am saying that the 2005 paper is from their original peptide formulation and not their pulsed lysate vaccine developed later. And yes I am saying that in 2022 Dr Liau was unequivocal that this later vaccine is the formulation that was commercially licensed for DCVax-L and that they are the same thing. 
icon url

QL300

01/01/26 12:36 PM

#806194 RE: exwannabe #806190

The fact that you continue to deny it's the same is mind boggling. Are you in a better position than LL when it comes to confirming whether or not it's one and the same?  You're not being clever when you make these arguments. You sound like a moron
icon url

EMHLondonUK

01/01/26 12:38 PM

#806197 RE: exwannabe #806190

I'm down 55k as you guys helped get it down to 18 cents at one point. This is a vanishingly small amount of my net worth. 
And your name is? Short position is what?

icon url

CaptainObvious

01/01/26 3:47 PM

#806246 RE: exwannabe #806190

That's the crux of your argument, but is it a distinction without a difference? Liau et al seem to think so.
icon url

theorysuit

01/01/26 3:59 PM

#806250 RE: exwannabe #806190

Yeah I am not sure why the pumpers even care. Whatever LL does with her version is for her own research. Nwbo can't use any of these results. The product is the process. It is just a distraction anyways. ...this company folds up on the failure of this submission and kills this set of bagholders. If they still exist they can pivot or run to another carrot.