The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
12 v 0 lol
Just love that filter button .. really improves the BB experience ...
Thankfully I am not.
But extremely grateful for your permission.
Th
lol
Discuss what want mate doesn't make any difference to me and politely I wont!
Bumptious has arrived who are you to dismiss legitimate discourse and decide what we should discuss? Politely get to feck
Regardless of intention from probably the primary authority of its type in the world really pretty unhelpful and more probably actually quite damaging to wider public perception of our treatment.
I'm really not sure why the subject is even being discussed as its just giving a non story air time!
Polygon
Board recruitment
Expert recruitment
IMO this is where we need to focus our attention
GLA
Yeah i'm really not happy with that title. Just the word 'Subcutaneous' before it would have been fine. But to generalify that 'Interferon' failed is a disgrace, especially considering they are funding the Activ2 trial with another interferon subject. Clarification is needed.
NIH
@NIH
News: Interferon does not improve outcomes for hospitalized adults with COVID-19
The above is actual heading.
Do you think they might headline and publish a tweet saying
‘mAbs do not improve outcomes for hospitalised adults with COVID -19 .’
Because a specific trial failed ? Because they have failed and I am pretty sure they would not consider posting in such blanket generality.
Various research shows approximately 80% of folk just read the headlines hence the 80 - 20 Rule.
MrCosts - "Why do people think the NIH made that tweet about [injected] interferon..."
They just got the results and wanted to make it clear to doctors across the world they shouldn't be treating covid patients with it. Especially those who heard about Synairgen's trial and erroneously concluded that subcutaneous interferon could be worth trying.
It's the most logical explanation and does away with all the conspiracy theories too.
MrCosts the timing and lack of accuracy does leave some real unanswered questions.
Without the bumptious dismissals - I don’t see a rush to answer your questions.
Given their investment in Interferon based trials how was this authorised and why now ?
Why do people think the NIH made that tweet about interferon when A2 has spent c. £30m on a interferon trial which is still awaiting results.
I don't understand why they would do that...
Yes it wasn't by accident. They published it because The Lancet published a paper on a trial which ended in December 2020 using sc Interferon and Remdesivir.
The timing on the NIH news this morning and now the Roche news was the NIH news deliberate for any reason ?
Doc, cutting indeed. Verging on disrespectful to those that gave us the correct regime for dexamethasone use. Saying that, he has been provoked as we all know!
The dig seems to be at the medical audience.
But thanks for explaining how science works.
Rumandpoker - ‘Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery’
Maybe the science we are based on is looking so good it is considered worth another punt to try and emulate it because the inhaled route is sewn up ?
I seem to recall it was being trialled in an attempt to lift the efficacy of remdesivir as they were desperate to try and find other drugs in a ****tail that would work and lift remdesivir usefulness.
This trial was almost a year ago
100% TL. To those new to this share, this issue was clarified early last year and resolved categorically that it has no relevance to interferon-beta or it's delivery method. A point reiterated and confirmed in the strong trial results so far. Nothing to be concerned about, as Sir Stephen made very clear and comprehensive in one of his panel discussions last summer.
A friend who works in health research read the report and highlighted the paragraph below.
On September 4, 2020, the study was modified to stop enrolling participants with severe COVID-19 who required high-flow oxygen and to exclude people who required non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation. These changes were made after the study’s Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) noted a greater rate of severe adverse events, particularly worsening of respiratory status, among participants requiring high-flow oxygen at enrollment who received interferon beta-1a compared to those who did not receive interferon beta-1a. The ACTT-3 investigators speculate that interferon may have increased the inflammatory response, leading to more severe respiratory disease in these participants. However, the investigators note that this worse outcome might have been influenced by baseline imbalances between the interferon and control groups.
Words used such as "might "and " speculate" show that they don't really know.
No conspiracy around the publishing date, it is quite normal to be this length of time from results.
That is how science works, Andy. Block upon block, slow and methodical, increment by increment. Not block one place, another elsewhere. Perhaps frustrating for some, but that is why its science, not religion we are talking about.
This issue has been clarified a long time ago. It has no relevance whatsoever to Synairgen. No serious investor would make any connection with Synairgen. Consequently the share price should not be affected; especially not with important news due to be announced at any time.
That's an expensive conspiracy since trails aren't cheap.
Perhaps it's just because there are million of research students out there that all have to come up with research ideas, many of which are not ground-breaking, but simply rehash/tinkering of previous experiments; in order to understand the insights gained better, double check prior results to provide further proof (whether positive or negative) or a litany of other reasons.