Member Info for Notposting

Alderbaran, just to add on the DSMB front, it’s important to appreciate that the inclusion of a paediatric element makes things considerably more complex. That inevitably adds time, cost, and a much higher level of scrutiny, and rightly so. It also increases risk, as paediatric trials are more likely to be paused than adult cohorts alone. On the other hand, positive outcomes from this group could be particularly well received.

I still don’t really understand the hype around the DSMB, as I’ve said before. There isn’t a “report” that will be released to the market despite what some are suggesting, and I don’t think too much should be read into how long this is taking. My suspicion is that the delay relates to the paediatric component, but ultimately it’s anyone’s guess.

Of course, Pingu will make silly statements suggesting that the riskiest element is complete based on a low dose and just three patients or that they are fully funded, which only highlights the absurdity of the claim.

Sadly, Peter, it seems to be the nature of some on this board who position themselves as ethically and morally superior… investing, as they claim, for the science rather than the returns, yet never hesitate to hurl abuse or be cruel.

A parfait pleases the tongue; an onion teaches the spirit.

You might want to double-check that reference. Misusing the Dunning–Kruger effect is, ironically, a great example of it.

I live a life full of joy and wonder, which only reinforces this truth: we see only what others choose to show us. Never forget that, and never be naive enough to assume otherwise.

“Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing, yet inwardly are ravening wolves"

There are plenty of those here, often masquerading as ‘LTHs.’” it seems.

JustHereForFleecing. I’d be happy too if I’d spent every day hyping this up while quietly offloading shares, only to disappear under the convenient excuse of “waiting for news.” Now you sit on risk-free warrants, posing as a loyal long-term holder and playing the saint while misleading others. It’s disingenuous, much like your “trading,” if your past posts are anything to go by.

The DSMB approval for patient 4 is unlikely to have much impact in reality. In my view, it is effectively priced in at this stage.

Hooplehead11 is sounding a lot like JustHereForHemo.

No wonder he’s so paranoid about everyone else. I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s running multiple accounts.

CheckRicky, I’m glad it appears you were stood up by your “special friend.”

If anyone should be reported, it’s you, given your previously removed posts claiming you had inside information and were intended to influence the share price, which potentially breaches Article 10 MAR (Unlawful Disclosure of Inside Information), Article 14 MAR (Insider Dealing), Article 15 MAR (Market Manipulation), and Section 118 FSMA 2000 (Market Abuse).

These actions can be reported to the FCA for investigation, and whilst I don’t agree with any cross-ramping or other companies being discussed elsewhere, I feel stronger about you and your trading “cohort” making misleading comments or posting hype while you trade at the cost of other shareholders.

No. Hemogenyx will be paying Cellin, not the other way around. Cellin is a contractor being paid to facilitate manufacturing/ regulatory support and that’s if anything even progresses that far, and even then it would be for an extremely limited number of patients. There is no agreement where Hemogenyx gets paid by Cellin directly or otherwise, not to add it’s just an LOI at this point too. That claim is pure fabrication.

I also don’t know why you keep posting like you’re the owner or gatekeeper of this forum or as if you speak on behalf of all shareholders. You don’t. You’re an emotional trader who has ramped this, dumped it and lied about it repeatedly, played the placings to your advantage, misled people repeatedly and then gaslit anyone who called you out, whilst all along commenting on others who may or may not trade it and talking about morality. This latest essay of yours is just another example of that behaviour.

Try and stick to facts in paragraphs, not fiction in essays.

I am not the one posting misleading information for financial gain. The markets are closed.

I directly responded to a post you made that was factually incorrect and intentionally misleading. Your claim that a DSMB draws “formal conclusions” is simply wrong. DSMBs do not draw formal conclusions, and suggesting the DSMB alone will inflate the market cap to £150–200 million, alongside being able to provide no examples of such impact in the UK is intentionally misleading.

Instead of addressing this, you have deflected and resorted to gaslighting. Pingu has done the same, failing to acknowledge being called out for previously misleading posts and now going off on a tangent, flooding the board to bury my challenge.

Pointing out misleading posts does not harm the science, the company, or its patients. It is only misleading to suggest otherwise. What does have a detrimental impact is those attempting to hype misleading posts while trading or sitting on risk-free warrants. You’re not the victim here.

The lack of credibility is clear when some of you respond with abuse, accusations, and gaslighting instead of apologising and stopping the dissemination of misleading information.

Your attempt at wit fails spectacularly. I’m not the one endlessly demanding pointless answers, interrogating someone’s position, or assuming I am owed a response like some of you do. Nor am I the one flooding the board with abusive, nonsensical posts to bury anyone calling out your dangerous and misleading statements.

Sleep well. Im not interested in the attacks nor bothered.

The irony when this is coming from someone whose 90–95% of posts are AI-generated/ assisted. It’s not lost (including the wording ie bland in your reply, which is the opposite of the suggestive and wholly misleading comments in your initial post)

You know exactly what you said and it was misleading, particularly your comments about “formal conclusions.”

If you’re going to make claims, at least back them up with real UK examples including the share price just before a Phase-1 DSMB announcement and immediately after. Otherwise, it reads as speculation at best.

It’s going to be interesting given the claims of this impacting to the extent of a £150–200m market cap and no other drivers supporting it (as I know some like to manipulate, this is without any other progress/ factors to be clear and just solely on DSMB). I suspect you’ll fail to provide any such example, let alone multiples.

Nice try, but people are far smarter than some of you give them credit for and can draw their own conclusions from our exchanges, except, of course, for those in your alleged “LTHs” WhatsApp group, who probably pile on anyone brave enough to call out such nonsense, hence the predictable likes on those posts.

Sleep well.

Hemotruth, I’m not answerable to you. Your questions are irrelevant, your assertions are laughable, and every time I respond, you disappear once you are made to look silly. I’d lose the sense of entitlement on a public forum.

Further misleading posts from Pingu and others, and intentionally so yet again.

The DSMB is an independent safety and QC. Its main role is to monitor participant safety, data quality, and protocol compliance. In a Phase 1 trial, it is not assessing efficacy in any meaningful way, because the trial is designed to test safety and dosing as you are fully aware.

It’s a misleading comment to make about interest in “efficacy” (based on “pre-established statistical guidelines”) and thinking you’ll be having a read of a report that’s unlikely to ever be released to the market. The most you’re likely to get is a basic release, and even that’s not necessary unless negative.

The post by Haywain is misleading. In a Phase 1 trial, the DSMB only monitors safety, data quality, and protocol compliance. It does not issue public or indeed, formal conclusions on efficacy, nor does it produce a report that could justify a sudden jump in market cap. Any mention of “formal conclusions” about cohort-level efficacy is pure speculation. Phase 1 efficacy data is exploratory, and DSMB reviews are internal, procedural, and focused on safety, not a market-moving RNS. It certainly isn’t going to create a £150-200m MCAP as ridiculously suggested in isolation.

Unless the warrants are exercised and even if they are, further funding will be required like around early Q1 in my opinion and to say otherwise or say they are funded as it stands is silly.

As for CheckRicky, I’m surprised he’s returned after his mindless ramping, hype, and repeated claims of inside information and secretive meetings. Honestly, I’d be genuinely concerned if anyone of real credibility took the time to meet with someone him.

Some people here continue to show just how toxic and dangerous these boards have become. This isn’t harmless speculation anymore. It’s manipulation and gaslighting at its finest.

I think it would be valuable for everyone to read all his posts from the time he was selling, as they reveal the misleading statements he made and highlight just how dangerous and costly they must have been at the time and then ask who is posting with an agenda and who is morally corrupt. It isn’t me, someone he continues to level abuse at.

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/justhereforhemo/?page=220

JustHereForHemo Premium Member

Posted in: HEMO

Posts: 5,932

Price: 8.22

No Opinion

RE: Good morning all :-)25 Nov 2020 09:40

Keeping this short and sweet:

The loan will not be drawn down this side of Christmas

When it is drawn down Mint will not be shorting or in any way trying to hurt the SP

Before the Loan IS drawn down the SP will be significantly higher than it is right now.

Please feel free to screen shot the above 3 statements as they are the 3 that I am most confident about, if I am wrong I pledge to donate £1k to charity and will do a vote on twitter for people to pick the charity. *(When the sp hits like 33p and makes me a million I will donate alot more) and post proof. I care about my image, when I am wrong I own up to it and if challenged on holding etc I post proof.

Seriously this panic selling is over something that just will not come to pass, its being spread by people with vested interests in making you sell and its not to save you money, its to short or buy in lower because they believe SP will rebound.

But Pumpky. He did not just sell that, did he? At first, I thought I may have misunderstood him, given the few who hang on his every word. However, a review of his posts shows he sold far more than he admitted in his reply to me, while presenting a misleading picture to investors. I looked back at the time he claimed he sold after the CLNs to clarify my thoughts and I saw concerning statements regarding Mint, including his “three guarantees” that it was a great deal, that shares would not be sold, that it was worth millions, and that he knew the investor, likely encouraged many to buy, all while he was quietly selling his own holdings by his own admission just yesterday. This is the classic behavior of a ramper, encouraging others to invest while profiting from their purchases, a pattern he has likely repeated many times. I knew little of him before, but it is far worse than I thought, and his history of dangerously motivated posts is clear.

Do not be fooled by claims of being a saviour. It’s self interest.

There is no post that says anything of that nature. A narrative posted by you.

I find it alarming that, despite claims of upholding morality, the forum allows such posts, including abusive content, posts mocking others, and likes or supportive reactions to abusive content, to go unchecked, even when it is clear that they are false and significantly misleading.