Member Info for Timster

I'm still reeling from MTD being dropped on us completely out of the blue....

More delays affecting the SP.

Newsflow is, um, flowing.

Big Al mentioned 17th in the interview for the poster presentation. So guessing he will release his video explanation next Monday.
Including a layman's description of what the ava6000 data means at this stage. Should be a very interesting watch.

Another 20 attempts we'll be through the ****er......

3996 was suggested to be agnostic due to the way a protease inhibitor works.
Ava6000 is not tumour agnostic.

It seems wynbore is the last fudster standing.

8 mins in deals with the question of how dox will perform.

https://www.voxmarkets.co.uk/articles/q-a-with-avacta-s-ceo-alastair-smith-e87d9e8/

Fantastic interview

Come on you ******* *******

And no replies to my "what could go wrong thread"

So we are all good.

I wouldn't worry about it just yet, but I'm sure it would be fine, following a standard process and not affecting your shareholding detrimentally.

Certainly sounds like it, another question for the investor meeting perhaps.

Great find energy, that was a question earlier on.

Fantastic news if avacta qualify.

WHO IS THIS LOSER, WHAT DOES HE WANT? WHY DO PEOPLE FEIGN DEATH TO AVOID TALKING TO HIM. WILL HE EVER GET THE MESSAGE HE HAS NO CREDIBILITY AND ALL* LSE MEMBERS HATE HIM!

* 2 LSE MEMBERS LOVE HIM

Sounds like wynbore is being wynbore, a clueless gambling moron, what a shock!

Filter it......

That's a lot of DOX

Not sure where that "pop" came from

It's a pop platform, a delivery system.

Once one drug is successfully delivered via this mechanism then it's proven and will work for anything.

Why would the mechanism stop working? It wouldn't.

Which ties in, I think with the quote from the interview linked on the NDA changes thread.

"But let me give you an example. First, I would say this is not the right place for first in human studies, early drug development, early biomarker development. But let's say you had approved drugs that are being tested for a new application and you really don't need a re-abrogation of the safety data. These are drugs that you have a vast amount of experience with in other diseases, and you already have some preliminary data that you have efficacy in the question that you're trying to answer.
In that circumstance, you could create a really streamlined clinical trial in which you really focus on the question at hand, and you could forsake or forego a lot of the data that's collected in any study and that frequently in any study is really barely used."

The FUD team really have not come up with anything tangible.

I really can't see how it could possibly fail now. We know it's cleaving and delivering therepeutic levels of dox to FAP rich tumours.

Phase 1b with the dox comparison may be the eye opener that's required by the market and perhaps big pharma (although after the article MrR posted a while back they are almost certainly all over it already)

So here's an Easter Monday challenge to identify what could go wrong at this stage?

Funding is the obvious FUD angle, but is there anything else?

I follow wynbore's trading patterns so will be a millionaire, by um.... Er......mmmm.......never.

Cheer up Richar, Jesus has risen. You miserable twat.