Inanaco18 Aug 2018 13:22
The whole drug development process works on the basis of a series of research/clinical steps. The starting point is a brilliant idea from a scientsist and every step thereafter is designed to research and robustly test that idea. All the way through every stage of preclinical development, product characterisation, Pharmacokinetics, toxicology and stability testing through to every stage of clinical trial the question at the end of each process will be - does this drug merit taking forward to the next stage?
You simply cannot deny that drugs can fall down at any stage, no matter how brilliant previous results have been. You only have to look at some of the shock clinical trial failures as proof. If it was possible to predict in advance that a trial would fail then of course they simply wouldn't have gone ahead with it. The very nature of the development process means that any failure is down to unforeseen and unpredictable reasons.
Your posts constantly asking for proof, for evidence of risk here are therefore simply not appropriate. It's not possible to provide proof of a future unknown event. However, you will find plenty of evidence of words of caution from world leading experts in the field.
Nobody here is trying to question Scancell's science - results to date have been excellent and there is every reason to believe that future trials will be successful. However, if it was possible to read Scancell's research papers and then come to the decision that there's no risk and the trials are guaranteed to succeed then don't you think someone might already have made an offer for Scancell? Wouldn't the institutions be fighting each other for an equity stake? Why would Scancell themselves want to get trials completed to validate the science?
Sign In
Follow the stocks
