Oh, and if it makes you feel any better, Bernie could neither confirm nor deny this when I asserted it directly to him today.
When I say informed, it doesn't have to mean anyone told me anything. I've done my DD, and this is the conclusion I've drawn, independently of anyone else.
I've never spread a lie on this board, or any board, for that matter. I'm a pragmatist; neither a pumper nor a basher.
Not only desperate, but a very sick individual indeed.
When INO starts producing vaccines for conditions of neurosis and psychosis, he will need us.
1. Thumbs down.
2. Reported as abuse.
3. Placed on permanent ignore.
How does that make you feel, turkey lips?
(Wait a minute, I won't be able to see your response!)
A partnership, if one is to come, will occur no sooner than Q3 2015 for the reasons elucidated in detail elsewhere.
And what if you're wrong, turkey lips?
Are you going to man up and bend over for all longs?
I wouldn't even respond to him.
His alias tells us something about his age and intelligence.
My first e-mail to Bernie, and I was very impressed with the brevity of his response and its content. Here it is:
Our stated milestone is that a phase I will start in 2Q 2014.
This product and trial have nothing to do with Roche, which licensed hep B and prostate.
We’re also looking forward to seeing this third product in our “cancer portfolio” move into a human study. It will be another step toward the overall process that we have spoken about: at the R&D level we are in identifying and will advance an even broader set of antigen targets that we believe offer significant potential in different combinations to target virtually all cancers. There are typically multiple possible antigens related to any particular cancer (or infectious disease, for that matter). (Antigens are simply proteins associated with a particular cancer or infectious disease that the immune system can recognize as being “foreign.”) Different antigens are associated with different cancers and, like hTERT, certain antigens are associated to greater or less degrees to multiple cancers. So when we design the individual DNA plasmid “constructs” that contain the code, or instructions, to produce a specific antigen in the body, we can mix and match them to create an optimal set of targets to activate T cells against a particular cancer.
Achieving the efficacy proof of concept for our technology with the phase II data was an historical step for our technology, our company, and the field. It’s onward and upward. From here.
I’m sorry to hear about your friend.
VP Investor Relations & Communications
858 336 5579
Possible, but Q3 2015 at the earliest, for reasons elucidated elsewhere in detail.
I generally agree with many of your posts, detriever, but your analogy of airplane flight risk to biotech PPS risk, is way off base--even for INO.
There is inherently WAY MORE RISK with ALL biotechs than with ALL airplane flight. If you don't get this, well, you need to rethink and restudy some things. LOL.
We've definitely gotten off the ground, but plenty of risk remains before landing. :)
Let's see if we can fly around the storms! :)
Having dreams and hopes is a good thing.
"Maybe big pharma just waiting to make sure INO's P3 trial protocol (and intent-to-treat group) is okay'd by FDA before they make a concerted effort to partner…"
This is it in a nutshell. P2 will not close until mid-year, 2015. Peer review paper not before Q1, 2015. FDA protocol for P3, not before Q3, 2015.
While partner discussions are likely going on ALL of the time, any formal offer WILL NOT come before Q3, 2015. Mark it.