Member Info for BuenaVista

The United Arab Emirates' state oil firm Adnoc may drill 42% more by 2030, according to analysts considered the international gold standard in oil market intelligence.

Between 2023 and 2050, only Saudi Arabia is expected to produce more.

Adnoc says projections show capacity to produce oil, not actual production.

It said it had already clearly stated plans to boost its production capacity by 7% over the next four years.

The firm said it was widely accepted that some oil and gas would be needed in decades ahead and that it was making its activities more climate-friendly, including by expanding into renewable energy.

@VR, what do you think AVA6000 has ALREADY been shown to do?

Fiona to TG delegation (top of page 2): "Weekly dosing could increase toxicity and fatigue, so it may be considered in the future but we have decided to trial fortnightly dosing."

The problem could be cumulative effect on blood cell levels over time. Also, nausea and other GI issues may be relatively transient but who wants to look forward to feeling nauseous and vomitting every week?!

I would prefer Breakthrough Therapy designation: https://www.fda.gov/patients/fast-track-breakthrough-therapy-accelerated-approval-priority-review/breakthrough-therapy

Hopefully that will be part of the promised news-rich Q4 period.

Would be good to have a few designations from the MHRA and EMA as well.

HurstBot is just a clown posting drivel every day. I'm amazed that there are people who still haven't put it in the bin.

Yawn

🥱

That Netflix film is about fentanyl, so a very emotivetopic. A quote from a review: "Once she gets one doctor hooked, Liza and Peter go about paying other doctors to switch over to prescribing their drug." Says as much about the doctors (US GPs) as it does about the ethics of someone working for a small floundering pharma startup. But might pharma companies pressure oncologists to stick with their own expensive anticancers instead of switching to AVA6000? Who knows?

Oil, you need to look at 'standard of care', a term that effectively means 'best practice'.

Pharma companies do not determine what treatment people receive and I don't know why you should think they might. It is the doctors who decide what treatment to give as they are the responsible people, and the ones who might face litigation if their choice of treatment goes against best practice and results in a bad outcome.

Pharma may try to influence doctors by sending reps to talk with them - typically about only one or two drugs that the company is promoting and/or for indications that the doctor has an interest or speciality in - and whatever the reps say has to be backed up by published literature of the peer reviewed type that the doctor can check up on and assess. This obviously brings the 'good' points of a drug to the doctor's attention (there is afterall a lot of medical literature coming at the doctor every day and some news and views may slip past unnoticed) and influences the doctor (as much by his/her opinion of the rep as by what the rep presents) but any prescribing decisions by the doctor are the responsibility of the doctor and, perhaps not unsuprisingly, they are greatly influenced by what others, especially 'opinion leaders' are prescribing and saying (herd safety).

I'd take January or February with the inclusion of C7 data and an announcement of a higher initial dose in the fortnightly study, but ONLY if Avacta WARNS the market that the Q4 target for these WILL BE missed and the reason(s) why. It's called communication, something that builds confidence and which Avacta has vowed to improve.

Or it's just showing 'London' time because we're in the UK. 😂😂😂

Great find again ES.

It would certainly create a huge splash if Phase 1a data were to be announced on that Tuesday in conjunction with and linked in some way to that webinar. Very strange, I think, that it should be stated that the webinar is from London - who cares where a webinar is based out of? Maybe the FDA has indeed been working closely with Avacta on the data release and this program in order to get AVA6000 out to cancer patients? We can only dream at the moment.

And even the chat functionality is ****.

I have eggy on filter but if it wote "large scale drug trials will be needed", that is b*ll*cks.

If there is a successful pivotal Phase 2 trial, AVA6000 would go on the market and there would be POST-MARKETING surveillance.

More likely to be diagnostic tests for specific genetic mutations than prophylactic AVA6000 dosing.

Speaking of which, I wonder whether Avacta is or will be doing genetic typing for the trials and indications to include in the pivotal Phase 2 trial.

I believe the key question is not 'Profit vs Care?' but 'What are the business dangers - financial and reputational - of our competitors having access to this platform?'

You say that JT, but it could be Q4 in Alan's special calendar.

It does seem like it is taking an inordinate length of time to get open data processed and released. I can only hope they are intending to include C7 data. Maybe the FDA insisted on seeing the C7 data before approving fortnightly dosing AT A HIGHER LEVEL than previously expected, in which case, time lost now would be time saved by starting Phase 1a.2 at a higher dose. Maybe 256mg/m² (being ~2/3 of the C7 dose)? Even better would be 320mg/m² (256 + 25%). One can only dream.

I think I've found him on LinkedIn (a Sales Director), still active and with a no doubt busy life. People can disappear for no bad reason. I've not posted to my YouTube account for 6 years and haven't uploaded any videos for over 15 years. Other things can take priority.

Does he like and comment there?