We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Any view of the sources it's used for that? I've seen these tools use a different avct and a different hci to provide insight into avacta.
Watch the last meeting, they explicitly said they wouldn't go public until they were ready.
Eggy, you've had 10 days off, did TW stop paying you, or have you come back to start the fud off as it's HCI time?
I think only 1 and 5 were RNSd. 5 because of the delay.
Nigel, up until the 28th June there was a slight drift downwards, mid 2.2 down to 2, with a range. Then a sudden drop after that, so your complaint about the SP is an interesting interpretation.
However you could also look 4 months back and then we're looking at a 60% rise. So there are many interpretations, but a 34% decline over 3 months is not a great one. 10% over 2.5 months and then 25% in 2 weeks is more realistic.
BV, hi from elsewhere, my point was that comparing the productivity to live meat is not the point, everything you've said I agree with though.
Surely the comparison should be with other artificial meat generation methods? Otherwise it's like comparing the MPG of a car and a walker.
The use of artificial meat is predicated on it being a lower CO2, more sustainable, ethically better means of producing a providing animal protein. Those are the arguments, not a higher yield than a cow in a field.
The cost will come down with scale, greenness can be assured with their choice of power supply, the ethical issue looks after itself.
I thought the protocol for MTD determination was once a DLT had been reached, recruit 3 more and try again, and if another (the same??) DLT is seen then MTD is declared at the level below. I assume this repetition to minimise the the risk that it is a false positive and just to do with that individual, and perhaps unrelated.
28th June 2.0
So a whole 12 working days ago it was 25% higher than now.
Nice cherry picking of numbers though.
Most that 34% was last week due to the fire. please try and think, I know it's hard.
Also note on the slides the range of dox in the tumor, it varies quite a bit, amongst humans, so extrapolating from mice is impossible as the human to human variation is high.
You need to understand what mtd is, simply max safe dose, the upper edge of the envelope of dosing regimes. You're talking about something more like a biologically effective dose which is the fall back position.
Note that on one of the slides it was noted how much was needed for 4 different mechanisms. So there are 4 effective dose levels they'd need to hit, the highest of which was met in de4 I think. But without knowing the mtd you are not going to know how high you can go, and it's quite possible that it becomes more effective at higher doses, doses that have been unachievable with std dox as its too unsafe.
No dimwit they would not have an accurate view of what the mtd is, there are too many factors. The mouse trial would let you know if it was likely to work that's all. You are embarrassing yourself, for the nth time, n is getting quite large now.
Duplicitous? If you think that management are being duplicitous then why are you even invested?
Strongly suggest that you learn the definition of that word, or perhaps you just carry on and see how the endgame plays out for that kind of accusation, actually.
touk full of **** as usual, just sell and move on if you're not happy.
there is no way that the mouse model would enable the estimates for the number of cycles before mtd or even the level of the mtd.
Yes, but they need to know how much more they can use. Are you not paying attention in the back? If you don't like how they are going about it then sell and f off.
It can't use valcade, there's no hook for the linker from what I understand
Will it, or will it just cause more PI's wanting 10% gains to turn up?
Other than all the people here that wrote about it?
And you know what, I wouldn't have minded if they had said that it was being shelved for a while.