Member Info for RuckRover

Molten, No you don’t (have to read them), it’s your choice. I guess like many of us you are frustrated by lack of news, activity and SP movement (upwards). I had thought, and stated, we’d be back into double figures this week. Early Monday it was looking promising but failed to hold alas.

As Konar says, there were some nuggets there. I suspect a lot missed them being too busy bashing people round the head and point scoring to recognise them. Ironically, the suggestion that we modify the topic and manner of conversation is the very thing that sparked it all off! :)

I’m off to Shropshire now so have a good weekend all.

>ruckrover ... as per your statement then No Patent ..<

Sorry, didn't understand this.

>when my discussion was with Bermuda <

Sorry, I didn't realise this was a private chat room. Padded I hope!

Inanaco,

You stated "you dont have to ... the point being the early searches would have found Prior Art"

The early searches DID find prior art, they always do, so what?

Let's try and calm down before someone's head explodes eh?

I can't remember why we are discussing this now, was there a point?

Ray (13:48)

You are right and no one here is disputing that. It is so that the applicant can get some feeling for whether a claim is likely to be successful. If it seems not, you can withdraw and save a lot of national fees.

I actually have a "world wide patent" awarded, I keep it with my chemistry O level!

Bermuda is correct:

"the whole idea of the PCT was purely to simplify the application process so that rather that having to submit different patent applications to each different office"

It merely simplifies the filing process.

My question was about the relevance of your link. This is bog standard patent processing.

Inanaco,

Why is this important?

Crumbs, yes, born into it, escaped when I was 43.

Ray,
fair enough, that is completely your prerogative, your choice.
Personally, I tend to use the Scancell information as the starting point, also there are plenty of posters who find and share links, Wild, goosed, crumbs, TF and others apologies if I have missed you. The latest presentation from the proactive event is great (it mentions autophagy!) .

I think the problem I (and others) have with Inan is his attempt to control everything - topics of conversation, conclusions, what can be asked (on the BB and the BOD) and how everyone other than him his thick. It reminds me of when I was captive in a religious cult, the leaders were right (regardless of how loopy their directions were), and there was a list of approved books, TV programs, songs that you were allowed access to. It was total mind control so when Inan attempts to do this I naturally react.

lol

Autophagy induces both citrullination and homocitrullination which are important for the Moditope platform. Citrullination has a patent granted and homocitrullination has a patent applied for.

Inan,

Why is it that you can't give a simple answer to a simple question? More people would find your posts "useful" then rather than the random cut and paste with no explanation.

The year of 2013 marked the 50th anniversary of C de Duve's coining of the term “autophagy” for the degradation process of cytoplasmic constituents in the lysosome/vacuole. This year we regretfully lost this great scientist, who contributed much during the early years of research to the field of autophagy. Soon after the discovery of lysosomes by de Duve, electron microscopy revealed autophagy as a means of delivering intracellular components to the lysosome. For a long time after the discovery of autophagy, studies failed to yield any significant advances at a molecular level in our understanding of this fundamental pathway of degradation.

The first breakthrough was made in the early 1990s, as autophagy was discovered in yeast subjected to starvation by microscopic observation. Next, a genetic effort to address the poorly understood problem of autophagy led to the discovery of many autophagy-defective mutants.

Subsequent identification of autophagy-related genes in yeast revealed unique sets of molecules involved in membrane dynamics during autophagy. ATG homologs were subsequently found in various organisms, indicating that the fundamental mechanism of autophagy is well conserved among eukaryotes. These findings brought revolutionary changes to research in this field. For instance, the last 10 years have seen remarkable progress in our understanding of autophagy, not only in terms of the molecular mechanisms of autophagy, but also with regard to its broad physiological roles and relevance to health and disease. Now our knowledge of autophagy is dramatically expanding day by day. Here, the historical landmarks underpinning the explosion of autophagy research are described with a particular focus on the contribution of yeast as a model organism.

Inan,

OK, serious question now. What relevance is autophagy to Scancell's current pipeline?

Inan,

"as i dismiss your arguments with ease "

If you believe that you are even more deluded than I thought.

Do you really believe that a qualified doctor (GP) in the course of their training does not know what autophagy is??

Inan,

You did not say "your average GP", this is what you put (cut and paste, word for word):

"which actually, for those of us that are following the technology makes us more experienced of the science than the INDUSTRY itself .."

The "industry" includes biotechs, pharmaceuticals, hospitals, consultants, even "average" GP and Prof Linda G Durrant herself. That's a big claim. Are you going to retract?

Inan,

"which actually, for those of us that are following the technology makes us more experienced of the science than the industry itself .."

If you believe that you are even more deluded (and conceited) than I thought.

Ray,

"I don't care what qualifications he has or has not"

Maybe you should?

AIMO DYOR

Inan, you wrote:

"so a great CV
so lets again take your posts over the last few weeks break them down into what is actually useful
surprise
Nothing .."

What you have to try to understand is that different people find different things "useful". I totally accept that YOU don't find many people's posts useful, including mine. So you should say "I" don't find your posts useful rather than "your posts don't contain anything useful".

I'm sure there are plenty of people here who find your posts "not useful" as well as those who find them "useful".
This is because people are "different" (see above)

You are probably now scratching your head trying to contemplate who on earth would find YOUR posts "not useful". Well, a couple of groups 1) those that do their own research and understand it as well (or better) than you. 2) Those who don't understand the science and 3) those who don't care (or care less) about the science

Inan,
>Ivy .. i have posting history on the science that you have accepted as acceptable <

Of course we all find your cut and paste clips very acceptable. It saves us time having to hunt them down ourselves so very grateful for that - thanks. Sometimes the conclusions you draw (particularly financial ones) are "sometimes" challenged!

The question was - Do you have any FORMAL qualifications in the field? I guess not since you have ducked the question.