Member Info for travel_light

Micky, I bet you win the wet the biscuit competition. Only cos Nr Ripply pumps you hard, so I hope you share.

Mr ripely, try some motion lotion, you’re starting to chaff.

Maybe rebalancing my portfolio. Asked a few question, pigeons came in, using big boy words.no need for it.

If people here want new people to invest, expect them to ask questions. I’d been interested in the answers but it gets drowned out in all the oh what a t**t, must be trading, etc etc.

Why would anybody invest in something new based on the Dutch Riders response. It’s not helping. Throw insults, I enjoy it.

So for us numpties and those that don’t sit on LSE for hours …

If a therapeutic dose has been reached in tumors not normally treated with pure DOX, why doesn’t ph2 start on original target tumors at this dosage. Expensive to run trials I guess, plus numbers.

If ph1 looking for MTB continues can ph2 up the dosage or is it fixed at phase 2 start hence we wait for mtb. Mac bang for buck.

It’s hard to wait but in long run quicker to get treatment dose right and not rerun a ph2 on higher dose.

Dutch Riders, take a break for a while, please. Try going outside.

Thanks.

I don’t doubt the science, to be honest I’m

not qualified. If it works it will be amazing for people and awesome for investors.

The article from the pharma new site was awesome. Helped clarify difference between progression verses survival.

Al has written and said stuff in the past which has been untrue or misleading. Trying to understand AIM speak is something we should all help each other with, at least LTH. Institutions get an inside line. Throwing insults is an odd reaction to thst, maybe people need to lower risk and maybe get out more.

It’s a phase 1 trial. Lots of drugs goto trial, lots of drugs fail at different steps. Grateful to people who take time to explain those risks. SP reflects that.

FAP targeting treatments have been tested and failed before I think. I don’t have links. Doesn’t mean this one will. It’s a risk. Balance portfolio accordingly. Help other to so.

Moneysponge

Ignore the Dutch Riders (https://youtu.be/ndp_RSeZn-g NSFW) whose only answer to any question about why SP is where it’s at or how the drug works is to throw insults.

Like pigeons spending their days squawking at every piece of enquiry. Any attempt to find a risk balance it becomes trafalgar square. Of course they have no doubts, I assume all 100% invested in Avacta.

Thanks. That was useful. Probably post if the day!

Heart broken

Rd thanks

Popsicle and rowboat,

Just giving back. If you don’t like don’t start it.

And cheers to those that responded normally

Hmmm have been burned by double speak on Aim, deep verge anyone?

So some (2 or more) surviving or not progressing.

Not wanting to to crass, and failing, but is it normal to see conditions not progress, at least for a period.

Basically some patients still be here (amen to that), and that being mentioned in a release, is it news? Could that have happened without ava6000?

You just copied what i said

I thought the patients has cancer types that did not respond to Dox, or was it patients had not been treated with it?

Does this mean that the market for AVA6000 is bigger than thought?

Thanks BV.

Would that mean applying a line through the data and projecting it forward would create an inaccurate impression of outcomes?

Not a mathematician

And apologies all for my typos, small keyboard, old eyes, etc etc

@BV thanks, should have thought of that.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3116111/#:~:text=There%20are%20two%20proposed%20mechanisms,1)%20%5B9%5D.

1. I think this is saying it buggers DNA so that the cell can make stuff it needs to make

2. It releases nasty s*** when broken down in a cell that really buggers cells

lots of abbreviations and funny latin/greek words.

cancer cells diving, so targets them, but really does a number of lots of other cells as well.

Guess one challenge is to make just right amount of dox from the precision stuff, so it is taken up at target, and not so much that its can't be taken up in cancer environment and leaks out systemically and kill the patient. Alternative, at some point the curve may level off cause FAP is saturated and can only convert so much per hour.

they should test to see where this happens, it could kill someone rather than treat them. Not a doctor.

Pl could you give me a polynomial of bean count to plate angel. Please show your working. Is the area under the curve a measure in calories or carpet stains ?

@jive’ just pulling your chain.

No need to wrap up the feeling of good news with the mumbo jumbo BS his lordship spouts to pump and dump/make himself feel important.

I scanned the pdf quickly, but not sure if numbers seen in tumors have been seen with straight dox ever. anyone know? Can anyone say what that effect will be. 3 times concentration might not mean 3 times the effect. Or does it ? Might be more, might be less. Guess why there is pb1 for different tumor types.

Freely admit I have no idea.

Your second part about pathways is interesting. I’m

hanging on by finger tips, can you put it in layman’s terms how this stuff works when it becomes dox.

Thanks

Monkhood would affirmers help grab those volatile compounds?

Https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/04/uk-trials-for-cancer-breath-tests-reach-final-stages

Given the car crash that was the lfd, it’s not even as if Prof Waffle even likes DX.

Are we saying midsummer ?