Replies to post #26720 on BioCurex, Inc.(fka BOCX)

[Gold Seeker]

Punch out, I am curious. What do you think would be the reason Dog RECAF is not selling?

Moro is reporting in the filings that as of May 31, no RECAF products have been sold.

With a product that has always been touted as having a huge demand, why would no RECAF tests be selling?

"OncoPet is currently engaged in discussions with distributors in North America and Europe. In addition, the OncoPet RECAF test will be offered in China, where according to recent reports, the pet market is rapidly expanding. This service will be offered by BioCurex's wholly owned subsidiary, BioCurex China Ltd., in Shanghai."

" Dr. Ricardo Moro-Vidal, Chief Executive Officer of BioCurex and President of OncoPet Diagnostics, stated, “We have worked very hard to launch our first direct commercial initiative in a large commercial market. It is of paramount importance to keep in mind that the OncoPet RECAF test for companion animals is not a substitution for our RECAF tests designed to detect cancer in human patients, but rather an addition aimed to accelerate revenue generation while the human tests move through the pre-marketing phases before commercialization. This represents a major step in our diligent work on all fronts to make BioCurex, Inc. a commercially successful enterprise. We believe that the OncoPet RECAF tests, along with other initiatives will allow us to become cash flow positive within 18 months.”

[Gold Seeker]

Punchout, this a quote from Opportunity where I responded that he should learn more about "studies"

"I have read articles from independent doctors that claim they are excited of our product and they are part of a huge study being performed by Biocurex. What must be happening since no one is communicating to shareholders is that Biocurex must be performing their own study to use these results to sell the rights to a pharmaceutical company that deals directly with veterinary clinics across the US and outside the US."

Above, Opportunity is stating that some non-scientific study is going to sway some pharmaceutical company to buy the rights. That is just a laughable statement.

You then come back making some "fluff" statements about how you cannot run controlled studies due to "ethical" reasons. Now you say "ethical" was just an example and did not even apply in this case.

You state: "the only practical way of running the study would be to retrieve samples from subjects that have agreed to participate and then subsequently analyze the data for sensitivity and specificity of the test. as far as i know, that is precisely what is being done."

How is BioCurex to know how many of the positive results are false and how many are true. How many tests is a Vet going to run on the dogs testing positive? Who is going to pay for all of the additonal testing? The owner? The VET? BioCurex? It certainly is not going to be BioCurex and the VET is certainly not going to offer all the additional testing for free so does the owner get screwed?

What kind of data is going to come from all this testing? It will be worthless and have little value. The fact is that the only method of getting decent data is from using known blood samples or someone is going to have to pay for a HUGE amount of additional testing if random selection of subjects is made.

[gaboy47]

Excellent post punchout!!!! I have to admit your post are rather refreshing. Believe you hit the nail on the head and drove it slap through the board with this one.

ethical concerns was simply an example in a general case.
for instance, in a drug trial, you cannot pick subjects to treat on a random basis. in most medically-relevant situations, subjects must give consent and be informed of experimental procedures.

in the context of recaf, the constraint is not necessarily a problem of ethics.

the only practical way of running the study would be to retrieve samples from subjects that have agreed to participate and then subsequently analyze the data for sensitivity and specificity of the test. as far as i know, that is precisely what is being done.

what different protocol are you trying to suggest? i am curious to know what you think the "controls" are that need to be implemented.

i think you just have a basic, layman's view, somehow believing that a proper study must always be groundbreaking, perfectly controlled, and have plentiful subjects. unfortunately, science isn't always so easy. a study is simply any planned collection of data with appropriate statistical analysis. i don't see how you can possibly argue that biocurex isn't really conducting a study...explain to me how the data obtained here is non-scientific and unreliable. there is absolutely nothing wrong with the current study, and saying so just makes it clear that you lack any training or education in the sciences.

please don't be so stubborn and defensive. accept your mistake and do some learning. i know it's not really relevant, but i am a medical student with an undergrad degree in neuroscience and economics (dealt a ton with scientific studies and statistics, if i really need to demonstrate my credibility) and i find it laughable that you think something is wrong with the recaf study...