Some random musings on a Monday:
Where did the ads go? Google suspended my participation in their Ad-sense program, apparently they already had their quota of Jews. Oh, they guised the real reason, said I had violated their rules. Yes, I clicked on an ad for a product advertised on my blog, actually bought it. Buying an advertised product is a violation of rules? I like my reason better.
My Lumbago has been intolerable for the past few months. I lasted seven minutes in a MRI machine in October, can you spell claustrophobia with Nurse Ratchet bellowing, "Don't move, Don't Move," through the tunnel from hell. The only thing that has worked for me is a narcotic analgesic. Habit forming. Stopped it cold turkey this weekend after at least four months of daily use. My body is pissed-off, big time.
NNVC. Ilene has sold just about all of hers, very skeptical. She's the science part of this brain trust. I'm the dreamer, holding on to my core position, still. This one can go either way, so Buyers and Sellers, beware.
Did a tax recap over the weekend (not a good weekend to go cold turkey anything) and have generated another six figure year daytrading. Not gloating, just saying it can be done. Mine isn't the only way, but it is mine, created out of the thin air by thinkin'. Go for it.
Planning to spend end of year on the beach in South Carolina. Going to watch my daughter play some high school basketball. She's starting point guard. Called me Saturday to say she was MVP at a tournament last week. Here come those tears again.
A
10 comments:
can Ilene explain the science aspect that is questionable??
Ron, First, yes, I would be interested in keeping up with your posting of these buyback plays. As for my percentage return, haven't computed it exactly, but well into triple figures.
A
"here come those tears"
Tears of joy, love and pride I hope!
Blessings of the Hliiday Season to you and yours!
Greg Reiman
My skepticism of nnvc is for several of reasons. First, their lack of peer review published studies. Second, the early-on status of their "next-penicillin" and their claims which are irresponsible in view of the early nature of their work. Third, their failure to answer some technical questions that I sent them. Fourth, my disbelief that nanoviricides-plus-ligand will have any significant effect on viruses whose pathogenicity is associated with extremely rapid intracellular replication. From my reading, having something floating around in the blood that might bind to a virus is not likely to stop the progression of diseases attributed to the rapid intracellular replication of the viruses. - Ilene
Ilene, thanks for your comments. One would wonder, the reason for such a stellar team to come together! I think one of them mentions, viricides being a 'chemical virus'! Do you know what they mean by this? Can you publish the technical questions (just the questions)?
From CNN today..
"In corporate news, Swiss drugmaker Roche saw its stock fall in Europe after the New England Journal of Medicine reported that four of eight patients treated in Vietnam for bird flu infections died despite the use of Roche's Tamiflu drug."
Yash
As a follow up to Ilene's comments, I would say this: if Viricides can show more, FDA acceptable effectiveness than currently available medicines then it has Value, not only to the Patients but also to the Market (irrespective of if this is the next penicillin or not!).
Allan,
Take this lyrics quiz for a nice diversion down the rabbit trails of life.
"Just looking for a new direction in an old familiar way."
http://www.geocities.com/wickedcool80s/answers.htm?200522
Roger Austin
P.S. Something we share in common is we both have two daughters....and they own our hearts forever.
Questions to nanoviricides, which I didn't come up with, but they're great questions:
1. the host produces a number of things that directly and specifically bind sites on the viruses, yet these are ineffective in eradicating the virus. What is the nature of the ligand that NNVC will use against avian flu, what is the antigenic target, and can you please detail the evidence that this ligand/target pair rapidly and effectively clears the virus either in vitro or (preferably) in vivo? How does this efficacy compare with that of antibodies produced by the body naturally, which also have a "GPS-like homing system" and attach themselves very specifically to antigens on the virus?
Part of this question has been answered re. the ligand.
2. How will nanoviricides eradicate reservoirs?
3. How will nanoviricides deal with viral swarms, that frequently display modified antigenic sites? How will you know if the site targeted by the nanoviricide can no longer be identified, and how will you deal with that, and what is the likelihood this will occur in vivo?
4. Nanoviricides will not be able to target viruses either intracellularly or that have become incorporated into the genome. How will this threat be eliminated to achieve a cure, or effective treatment?
5. What toxic side effects do you anticipate, and how do you propose to deal with these?
6. What is the half-life of nanoviricides, how is it cleared, and how much is taken out during first pass through the lungs?
7. What pharmacokinetic model most closely approximates the distribution and clearance phases?
8. Will there be an immune response to nanoviricides? Will the body sense it as being foreign, and attack it with natural or adaptive antibodies or via some other mechanism to isolate it and remove it from the body, and how do you know?
9. What is the longest period of time nanoviricides can be injected, and what is the highest dose tolerable? Will both these be sufficient to target virus effectively, and how do you know?
10. What is the dissociation constant between the nanoviricide ligand and the viral target?
11. What is Dr. Rossi's role at NNVC? Is he personally performing any experimental work for NNVC in his labs at the City of Hope, and if so, what?
12. Regarding HivCide, what antigen will be targeted, and how does this differ from the antigens targeted by the various anti-HIV antibodies normally produced? Why and how is the HivCide approach superior?
"As a follow up to Ilene's comments, I would say this: if Viricides can show more, FDA acceptable effectiveness than currently available medicines then it has Value, not only to the Patients but also to the Market (irrespective of if this is the next penicillin or not!)."
What makes you think they can?
Ilene
Ilene, thanks for the questions.
"What makes you think they can?"
It's a probability game! They have moved from internal labs to external labs, under the direction of Dr. Krishna Menon. Looks like the polymer micelle is Safe! Also it looks like they have already seen some efficacy of the approach. I have spoken to Dr. Krishna Menon and he indicated the technology looks promising. So I feel the probability for it to work effectively has increased considerably! Time will tell.
As far as answers to the questions raised, they will not be forthcoming until and unless they have conducted the studies, both animal and humans. Right now they have been able to show the efficacy on a small, controlled scale and they have a buy in from emminent scientists!!
Post a Comment