I tend to agree but there are degrees of offshoreness, so to speak. Israel for instance might want to allow a promising treatment on a non-guarantee basis. No individual doctor would want to sponsor innovative but unproven treatment, but a national health service might.
Have to wonder why an offshore clinic can't be found where NWBO could initiate trtmt without interference from BP. Sounds crazy, but if people are desperate...?
Many years ago when I was a student at the U of Minnesota, Noam Chomsky was a visiting professor. He held a lecture and invited questions. I recall I stood up in a sea of leftists and asked what he thought of our porous border. I said exactly that...years before the phrase entered common discourse. I am rather proud of that.
His response was that the USA would not have problems with immigration from Central America/ Mexico if we had not intervened in their history many years before ( invasions on behalf of United Fruit etc. ). That was it. It is clear the leftists think no further than the reach of their emotional need to hate the US; perhaps they might spare a moment or two of their time to think of the well being of their fellow citizens - like those near the southern border - but frankly I doubt it.
The disaffection of the American left is something to behold. Ultimately it is limited because there are no more strictly Communist countries anymore, excluding North Korea, and Cuba.
Their movement is running on fumes.
As to what precisely the millions of semi-literate disease ridden Central Americans / Mexican are going to do in the USA is not discussed. They certainly are not going to do any high tech work. They are not going to displace any Indians or Chinese immigrants. The one thing they are not going to do is go back to countries run by people like them. In the meantime they will hate the country that is feeding and housing them.
Well I guess the clear winners are the Hispanics and the restless unemployed blacks. Hmm.
But but but they're Americans! And their votes count too! Just as much as yours, whitey!
Yeah, got it. Nation-building sentiments for sure.
Clinton allowed 4 brave American soldiers to die, and is a felon under DHS law. LBJ and the USS Liberty come to mind - 275 sailors allowed to perish - as Thomas Scheuer has said :"Democrats like to watch Americans die ...".
Clinton and her disbarred lawyer husband run a slush fund for a living and charge exorbitant speaking fees as a profession. Both have been selling influence for so many years they think that is what a public official is supposed to do.
Sanders is a Communist.
Rubio is in the closet.
Kasich wants to repopulate the country with Mexicans and Somalis.
This is competition?
Trump is a self-made billionaire.
I rather doubt you have his intelligence.
Are those whose biomarkers indicate susceptibility to vaccination a small minority of patients of those enrolled in the trial? Would there be any ethical objections to pre-treatment investigations?
Well what does Ino plan to do about it? I read about Intercept, the product of Cerus, yet nothing about Ino. In fact when I read an article in Investopedia about Intercept, Inovio was referred to disparagingly as promoters of an outmoded vaccine.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Voting is mathematically speaking of no significance unless your vote decides an otherwise tied election. The odds against that are of course astronomical. Furthermore, politicians are not covered by laws of commercial speech and can therefore lie with impunity. Voting is akin to throwing pennies into a wishing well.
When I think of threats to personal safety I don't think of criminally insane persons. I think secret agencies of governments getting revenge on threats to the nation. I think Robert Maxwell getting tossed overboard. Safra getting burned alive in his safe room in Monaco. If certain high level agencies in governments feel "Phase V" or whatever is out to trash national prestige in serious scientific endeavors for reasons that are simply unethical I would, if I were a Phase V guy, lock my doors at night.
I'm sure the quality of his backing and information is very high. UK is working to become a biotech powerhouse from what I have read.
Should retail buyers worry that the shares they bought might be bogus?
Let's see here...you have sold shares you borrowed from a broker and are paying interest on that, and you are interested in spreading uncertainty about the value of the stock in the hope that shares will be sold and you can then buy them back....and you have no scientific insight. Can you give us brief criticism of the efficiency issues alluded to...?
The naked shorts are risking nothing, so unless you can quantify their contribution your equation is useless.