Member Info for jack_allis

"In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 shows a significant reduction in viral replication following type I IFN treatment. At both 24 and 48 hours post infection, SARS-CoV-2 had massive 3-log (24 HPI) and 4-log (48 HPI) drops in viral titer as compared to control untreated cells. Together, the results demonstrate clear type I IFN sensitivity in SARS-CoV-2 not observed with SARS-CoV."

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.07.982264v1.full.pdf

couple of standout quotes from the interview that i found quite telling and that seem to suggest Richard they have witnessed a positive results and are now just crossing the ts and dotting the is

"we're treating people" @c.6 min - not, Richard did not say we are testing the drug on people but actually we are "treating" people, why would you use the word treating if it was not working...

"making sure we're when we get the results from the trials discuss them with the regulators and be in a position to implement next steps straight away, that requires devices....so we've started a manufacturing process to do that" - here he is saying the next step would be manufacture, in a normal trial that would not be a default, a given - here it is as if it is. The wording here could have been analyse the results and decide what to do, but no its discuss the results and then move to manufacture again suggesting the results are positive and the obvious next step is manufacture

"work hard to put the drug in the right context, we dont want a grey result, we want definitive data....so that the drug can move towards approvals.." again - similar to previous quote - the definitive data that moves us towards approvals. Its to even mentioned definitive data in the negative i.e. that could send us back to the drawing board, its definitive data that will move us towards approvals.

Yes, this is also the same as the one in the link Ghia posted earlier, was wondering if anyone who watched this mornings BBC News piece in Bristol could confirm if thats the one they saw the patient using

i.e. the one in this link:

http://www.aimzine.co.uk/aimzine/0909/0909_B1/0909_B1.htm

Can anybody who watched the Lee Peters BBC News interview this morning confirm whether this is the nebuliser that he was using?

This is also the profile of patient being recruited to the trial according to the WHO Ordinal Scale - affected patients in the early stage, another indicator that we should see results from the trials - profile of patients being recruited is exactly that which would most likely benefit from IFN inducement

The initial trial was just for 100 patients across 10 hospital sites. The 25th March RNS did say a successful outcome from this initial batch would 'inform onward progression' and I recall reading somewhere that if the initial trials were successful they would be expanded. The fact that they now want to do this in home settings is an expansion suggesting, nay if their original comments are anything to go by i.e. the criteria for expansion, confirming they are witnessing success with the trials.

"SARS-CoV-2, despite the higher titre, *does not induce interferon secretion* and causes lower upregulation of proinflammatory cytokines than does SARS-CoV."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30008-2/fulltext

Emphasis in above quote is my own

"In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 shows a significant reduction in viral replication following type I IFN treatment. At both 24 and 48 hours post infection, SARS-CoV-2 had massive 3-log (24 HPI) and 4-log (48 HPI) drops in viral titer as compared to control untreated cells. Together, the results demonstrate clear type I IFN sensitivity in SARS-CoV-2 not observed with SARS-CoV."

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.07.982264v1.full.pdf
"

"The authors obtained human lung tissue samples from 6 donors who were not infected with
SARS-CoV-2 and divided each sample into two subcultures to compare viral replication and
immune activation caused by experimental infection with SARS-CoV-2 to that for SARS-CoV.

This self-paired design addresses potential random differences between tissue samples that are a
problem for small studies. The investigators found that although these two coronaviruses have
similar cell tropism (types I and II pneumocytes, as well as alveolar macrophages), infection and
viral replication was much more efficient for SARS-CoV-2 than SARS-CoV. The higher viral
levels associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection may reflect an even more striking observation
from this study: SARS-CoV-2 largely failed to induce expression of any IFNs (type I, II or III) in
the infected human lung tissues. While this study does not address how SARS-CoV-2 evades the
innate immune response and suppresses endogenous IFN production, these results suggest that
treatment with exogenous IFN might be effective against SARS-CoV-2."

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa453/5821272

Whoever can should tweet the journo that wrote it, highlighting his huge miss and exactly what SNG is doing @JamesTGallagher

Manifesto - can you link to the Chinese directive?

Institutional Investors have strict guidelines they must adhere to, thus regardless how stellar the opportunity if their criteria to exit e.g. % profit is hit, they exit

Atleast one of those IIs is c. 12.5% down YTD where its 5 years average annualised performance is +12.5% is a key reason its selling - taking a huge profit here.

As for your second point gross margins at last interims were 67% so not exactly 'small'. Additionally with a demand for millions upon millions, of antibody tests nationally and globally even if its a 'small' slice, that 'small' slice will be quite large indeed

Great point Dibs, I would add a key reason for NCYT's massive success was due to it also being platform agnostic. This will be a massive selling point for ODX here and internationally.

Given the importance of the antibody test and the pre-existing relationship between Mologic and the Govt, the Government would likely have been informed even before the news release on the webpage at 1600.

On Friday's briefing, Saturday morning press release from the government, on Saturday evening daily briefing and on this morning's Marr show Mologic was not mentioned nor the availability of a 'successful' antibody test, which can only mean that the Mologic test, for whatever reason, does not meet UK requirements.

That aside, even if it was a successful test, the demand for antibody tests is so huge many companies will benefit from th vast market.

Trek, it is been confirmed, publicly, that its funded through to manufacture and then revenues from Sales will carry it from there. What more is there to answer.

I see Trek is conveniently ignoring the reports I posted that clearly state ODX has already received funding from the government. Ofc they dont fit his agenda so what else to expect.

Absolutely includes ODX

PS. Just to add, the RNS Trek posted from was from the 2nd of April. The news release stating ODX had become part of the Consortium and received funding for doing so was from the 9th of April.