Karen, lets discuss the differences between a cure for AMD & SMD and treatments of these diseases
A cure means that, after medical treatment a patient no longer has that particular condition, whereas treatment means managing the disease, sight will not improve, but the disease will be slowed down.
Presently there is no treatments available for stargards (SMD), whereas macular(AMD) does have treatment drugs available.
Now getting to the meat of my argument; the first two ladies injected with RPE cells, soon afterward reported improved vision, meaning the disease was stopped in its tracks and vision improved, which is a great thing in itself. Another great thing, is that no patient after being injected has reported that their vision has worsened, meaning the the progression of the diseases has been stopped, and that is called efficacy because it has effected a beneficial change in the patients.
Finally, the current trials were all based on safety first, and patients were chosen on the basis that the eye being being treated was so far along in deteioration, that if the injection caused them to lose the eye it wouldn't be a complete tragedy, because they were sure to lose sight in that eye. So, if you can stop the disease from progressing and also show improvement in vision, then in my book, ACT is on its way to curing AMD & SMD.
1." the first two ladies injected with RPE cells, soon afterward reported improved vision, meaning the disease was stopped in its tracks and vision improved, which is a great thing in itself."
Reporting these two results prematurely was a mistake. It is why the safety issues don't matter to anyone watching actc, it's efficacy that matters now. Safety is a give. There has been no word from these two ladies, since January 2012, so you and I know nothing about sustained improvement. All we know is that GR states there have been no adverse reactions.
2. "Another great thing, is that no patient after being injected has reported that their vision has worsened, meaning the the progression of the diseases has been stopped, and that is called efficacy because it has effected a beneficial change in the patients."
This isn't true. You know nothing about the vision of each candidate tested, whether their vision worsened or improved, since GR and company is not providing any details on the additional 11 patients, and their prognosis (current). I don't suggest the vision should or would become worse with the injection, I'm only saying that we know zero about the last 11 patients except that there have been some improvements, in some patients, no issues with safety in any of them, and that Maurie has stated many times that she has no visual improvement with the first 100K injection.
As to whether to call the therapy a cure or not is moot. I do know that Lanza and Rabin have said many times that it's not a cure, but call it what you will, the affect remains the same as you imply. GR not being forthcoming and "detailed" in the last cc, about the patients/injections, is just one of a dozen reasons why the street wants to kill actc, and is doing so slowly.
Invoke that primal "instinct" and prophecy ................
Re: Re: Form 8-K was filed 9/14 to the SEC by ACTC. Can someone tell me if it's significant.
By njdanny69 . Sep 19, 2012 5:02 PM .
Thanks RyanPen, how many share did Alpha get? By the way, I'm already "in" and have been for about 2 years now. Last Decemeber I purchased the bulk of what I own in ACTC at 8.5 cents. I truly believe in this stock and have used "instinct" a lot. My instincts are generally pretty good but instincts do not tell me the definitions of terms etc. I really appreciate your response.