Member Info for inanaco

i was so angry when Ruck stated i had "Duped" the BB ..........

i don't remove posts ?

not my job

just picking up on your recent posts and how ridiculous you sound because of your so called " i am allowed to change position"

however that is fair enough and i accept that ...... but maybe then you had it wrong for years because Scancell has not suddenly changed position on the science

i am highlighting "" I have NOT changed position ""

the problem is ........ like joining the dots ... Ruck ...

when you do ....

""What irks me, and presumably a few others, is the conclusions he then draws purely on his own (very) limited understanding ergo “no risk”, “vaccine works”, “Scancell are number one”, “£8 in eighteen months”.
As I have said before, such claims are very misleading and dangerous.""

you get as Burble rightly described ...

Do I believe in the products/platforms? Yes
Do I believe we can get through phase 1, 2 and 3 clinical trials? Yes, based on the evidence in front of me currently

LOL

the point i am making .......

Ruck one min ....... won't buy any more

next min .......... " I am allowed to change my mind"

yet some of us have been absolutely "Consistent" ... for 8 years that the science will indeed work as proven by the SCIB1 results

No body "duped" Ruck to buy in he pressed his own Buy Button ............ interested if any body feels they had been "duped" into buying ...

I do ............ but you then call it ramping "duped" .... this science has been ongoing since 2012 ... so at what point did we dupe any body ?

To build a response against cancer the vaccine is given many times and can take up to a year to develop a response, the memory response is induced by the stimulated t cells engaging the cancer in this instance. As explained its a chronic condition.

even a flu vaccine takes a month or so to build resistance

Unfortunately its not designed for this setting as Covid is not a chronic condition ATB

Yes leas ... still here ... not about getting it wrong ... its was about being consistent , the science has always been spot on ... and now the £ in my account is rocketing because of that ... and like wise any other that followed "all about the number you hold" not the number you don't ......... especially when it came to the 4 for 51 offer

do i need to ...... we have been describing it as a "land Grab patent" .. Scancells words

didn't hear any complaints from Ruck then about Scancell ramping !!

Your Words LL...

I know I'm in the "glee" club, but I reckon all here are lucky to have been at the forefront of this. Not only are Scancell ahead of many others chasing to be the first with a longer term vaccine, but they have an effective delivery system, which could be all the difference it takes to be a commercial success.

My posts just agree with you ..

ATB

and Ruck cannot read the word "donors" . ........... so proven he argues against posts without even reading them ...

Figure 1Aii shows more detailed examples of
responses in some of the donors highlighting that most donors
respond to one or more of the citrullinated peptides. Phenotypic
analysis of the proliferating responses demonstrated that it was
CD4 + T cells proliferating in response to the citrullinated peptides rather than CD4 negative cells (including CD8+ cells). In
addition, these responses appear to be predominantly to the
citrullinated peptide rather than to the native (wildtype) sequence.
Representative data for each peptide is shown in Figure 1(b). The
citrullinated enolase and vimentin peptides have previously been
shown to be restricted through HLA-DR*0401.9,10,13,14 Analysis of
the HLA types of responding donors revealed that of responders
only 4/14 (28%) were known to be HLA-DR*0401 positive (Table
1). In contrast 10/14 (71%) of the responding donors were known
to be HLA-DP4 positive with three of unknown HLA type. Only
one responding donor, BD0011, was known to be HLA-DP4
negative. HLA-DP4 is known to be expressed by up to 70% of
the Caucasian population and therefore developing a vaccine
relevant to HLA-DP4 positive individuals broadens the use of
the vaccine.

summary ....

Ruck thinks we are Not world leaders ...

but cannot name who is ...

and something about a Mouse ...

..... time to eat

i posted the actual data ........... cannot be more precise that that

sorry who mentioned Humans ?

Blood ... you can find T cells there

its a scientific paper presented by Scancell ........ if you feel its wrong take it up with Lindy ...

throw the same back at you mate ... why are you so obsessed with my posts ... nobody else is ..

suggest you contact scancell ...

inanaco

Posted in: SCLP

Posts: 32,515

Price: 12.00

No Opinion

RE: we are about to find out ..........11 Sep 2020 11:29
so lets try another question ...

The mouse model of SCIb1 produced "above expectations in Humans "

the mouse model of Scib1 with Murine PD-1 ... indicates a better response ....

if you trust the human data ... how much weight should be given to the second mouse trial with PD-1 ??

Burble has the intellectual capacity to make a case

unfortunately ... Nothing Man can't indeed is reliant on Burbles post to try and make a case ..

however Human blood trumps ...

you still not answered the Mouse question on Scib1 ... Ruck

at the end of the day we all know why Ruck is upset ..........

RuckRover

Posted in: SCLP

Posts: 3,415

Price: 5.25

No Opinion

RE: Locked In15 Jul 2020 15:51
Bunsie,
I have bought Scancell shares in the 30s, 40s and 50s. Fortunately by selling and rebuying I have managed to keep my average far lower than that would suggest.
I think we have to face the reality that some will have no choice than to sell at a loss. Imagine you paid 50p or more and fell for the “buy and hold”, “no risk” rubbish being spouted at the time.
Even IF we were to get back to the mcap of the peak, the shares would only be worth 25p. So not only have you lost half of your investment, you have lost 8 years of potential returns elsewhere.
Not a great prospect is it?