An update regarding my last post (Februaryish). The average (mean) time window for BIEL to be approved has closed. It appears, according to the CDHR project history data, that news whether reclass will happen for shortwave diathermy (the category under which Bioelectronics falls) isn't going to come until the 3rd quarter of 2016 at the earliest.... but, right now, 1st quarter 2017 looks more likely.
Why? You may ask. The CDHR board is passing its final order on only 3-4 categories per year. They appear to be going in chronological order respecting the date of the initial proposal order regarding each category. There are 5 categories in line ahead of shortwave diathermy and the board has only weighed in on 1, so far, this year. If they rule on 1 per quarter (on average), shortwave diathermy won't be ruled on until quarter 3 of 2016. If this month passes without a ruling on any category they will only have ruled on 1 for the first 2 quarters of this year. I will never bet on the bureaucracy speeding things up, especially, when they appear to be slowing down.
Let us all remember that management is starting additional clinicals for IMO 8400 , Vin Milano confirmed it today , It is very unlikely that they do have any hesitation about its efficacy
As for endpoint numbers , we all know that the extent of the ongoing trials is limited to certain proof of respond from paitents , Vin confirmed today that they finished dozing the first clinical protocol , then expanding must be a decision that will bring in more meaningful and valuable results , and the WM foundation will never promote an expansion if there is any thing less than staisfactory
Let us remember that the paitents were refractory paitents , recruiting must have been a dificult task in the past 10 months or so , but if they experienced good results it will make their clinical timeline more feasible
What are you talking about? You just lost 10% of your ownership in POZN, we all did - in a BO, if you own a lot of shares like me, you just lost thousands of dollars of profit. Removing Platcheka didn't increase the potential value of a BO either. And if you think trying to sell PA on their own is a good idea, you haven't witnessed how it crushed other biotechs like I have.
You know I am somewhat new to this board. But I can always spot when a person seems rather agitated. Is something troubling you?......I mean sure looks to me like you have the alias wheel in full motion today......................Sorry about your 4 for 4 losers. I guess that must be hard to deal with. Must be doubly hard if someone were to come across like a total bll oww harrd when pumping them............Must be triplearly hard to have a recordguy2000 but pounding as sort of the cherry on top................Are you some kind of an id iot? I mean you sure seem like a glutton for punishment. What kind of a maniac follows other posters to their message boards and doesnt think their would be repercussions?
May 19, 2015
World Nuclear News: U.S. Utilities Endorse Novel Nuclear Fuel
Lightbridge's May 18 announcement that four major nuclear utilities have told the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that the Company's advanced metallic fuel is "an evolutionary step forward in nuclear fuels, providing improved safety, performance and economics" continues to generate news coverage, including the following article by World Nuclear News.
US utilities endorse novel nuclear fuel
19 May 2015
A group of US electric utilities has formally expressed interest in Lightbridge Corporation's novel metallic fuel design to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
In a letter to the regulator dated 14 April, the Nuclear Utility Fuel Advisory Board (NUFAB) said it believed the fuel provided opportunities to improve safety and fuel cycle economics significantly. NUFAB's members include Dominion, Duke Energy, Exelon and Southern Nuclear, and together they represent nearly half of the country's nuclear generating capacity. The NRC uses such communications to help in forward planning its staffing levels and budgets in anticipation of licensing applications reviews.
Lightbridge's metallic fuel is made from a zirconium-uranium (Zr-U) alloy and uses a unique composition with a multi-lobed and helically twisted rod geometry. The design offers improved heat transfer properties, enabling it to operate at a higher power density than uranium oxide fuels in use today.
NUFAB made its submission to NRC ahead of an application for the use of the fuel in lead test assemblies, which is expected to be submitted in 2017. The test assemblies could be inserted into an operating US pressurized water reactor (PWR) as early as 2020.
Fabricated samples of the fuel are expected to undergo full irradiation testing under prototypical PWR conditions in a pressurized water loop of Norway's 25 MW Halden research reactor, starting in 2017. Post-irradiation examinations of those samples will be used to support the applica