See the Smith article and learn why discoducks $7 valuation is pipe dream stuff. According to Smith the use of 2 different sources for the treatment makes it impossible for approval without at least 1 maybe 2 P3 trials. That is going to cost a fortune and dilute this stock maybe 3 times over! Its what you don't know that bites you in the #$%$ It also means that this treatment will be years behind NWBO. So glad I split my investment! So Glad! Cant believe that I missed this point! Maybe should sell the rest now and come back in about 2 years?
Actually the Smith article makes no such point...it simply states that treatment preps were done at two different sites. The key is to have the procedures done to GMP and meeting the same specs at both sites...if that was done, then there is no issue...AJ
Why should anyone listen to you? You split your investment?
If you invested money in NWBO 1 year ago (or even in Dec.), you'd have about half as much today. So you listen to the street? The street has spoken. I've made money on IMUC in the last year.
NWBO has a joke of a "PIII" trial (heard any news lately?), a sketchy-at-best and duplicitous CEO, no money, and no way to avoid a massive dilution (if they want to keep their "PIII" going for another ten years) - well I guess there is bankruptcy.
I think I'll skip the benefit of your "knowledge".
I think you miss the point here. The point is....... why is IMUC selling for $2.50 when we have passed the stage where efficacy is uncertain? It did not make any sense. Now it does! Sure we know it works just not how well and it seems it might show at least a 9 month efficacy. I was hoping to double my money by mid 2014 but it looks like I'm in the same situation as with NWBO. Both have this enormous hang over of considerable future dilution. NWBO investors knew this but I don't think very many IMUC investor seriously thought a mandatory P3 was in the works. Again look for years of sub $3 price range and massive dilution. Yu is a long range guy, Singh was more of short term outlook guy( lets prove the principle and sell out ) I'm not going to wait 5 years to get $7 a share.
yeah good point in relying 100% on a different man's opinion ;) no seriously - I get the critique. But weigh in: ICT doesn't actually hurt anybody, the cancer is one of the worst (FDA can be a little easier), the results have to show 4-5months improvements and ph1 showed 8months. The results will be good, if having your money in it when it happens is your only problem - lucky you.
So in the end: Is ca. 130 patiens statistically strong enough for 4-5k patients yearly and how will the FDA react to the 2 different sources of the treatment? Those are my 2 main concerns - but the upside is much greater IMO. Same goes for the stockprice - upside is much greater than downside - that's why I'm in.
no need to come back in 2 years. with no documented t cell response [re: immune response] this will be another failed Ph. III trial. a' la gnvc, nvlt, aezs, clsn, ziop, onty, and on and on.
as our visiting immunologists with 30+ ys. of experience and several papers published in prestigious journals has been called a moron and a d' bag [lol !] , by our resident accountant, it would be nice to find another scientist to dispute/agree with his opinion. ....[conclusion?]
Um...I don't understand yer post either. Antigen detection (immune response) has been reported for both trials PI - II.
As to the two different providers of inoculate, the fact that the treatment is autologous is in our favor, historically, scrutiny is less severe. This also helps if there is any hope for early approval.
unless Phase 2 results are off the hook good and people are living instead of dying which should be the first consideration of any discussion or debate and if this happens, you are left on the dock waving to the boat you missed