(Total Views: 621)
Posted On: 02/25/2020 6:06:38 PM
Post# of 1460
Below from IHUB falconer66a on Anavex and MS,
Fletch
falconer66a Tuesday, 02/25/20 05:39:09 PM
Re: plexrec post# 238474 0
Post # of 238487
The Data Are Profound
Quote:
-care to opine on this recent MS news Re:2-73 and MS
TIA
At first, I thought I’d go point by point, telling how the information and data in this peer-reviewed paper just so thoroughly substantiate the efficacy of blarcamesine (Anavex 2-73) as a treatment (or prevention) of multiple sclerosis (MS).
But I’ve done that sort of thing many times before; to no avail. Those who can understand the presented biology and chemistry in the paper will realize the many, so-favorable implications. My comments won’t change their perceptions (which are the same as mine).
(As previously, we all invite Anavex naysayers to pick apart the paper. The absence of such postings says everything, does it not?)
But for the majority of those reading (or at least skimming) the paper, what is being claimed will not be understood. It will be perceived as some sort of “pump the story” presentation. Some author(s) with letters after their names making all sorts of interesting claims about some new drug that can’t be sold or used to treat a single disease.
I have only two letters after my name (B.S.), with alternative interpretations. My presentation of details of the paper would be pretty much just a bit of entertainment. For those who know my professional perspectives on Anavex sciences, they already know that this new treatment target (of MS) will be both valid and profound. Not a thing in the paper to evoke concern. The mechanism(s) of action of blarcamesine are well described; not just plausible, but actual; now with multiple sclerosis.
But for most who read the messages here, the actual science of the Anavex molecules is only a side-story. Many, here, are traders, looking for the AVXL price to go up, whereupon it can be sold and profits taken. Presently, that crowd is scratching its heads wondering when to jump back in to repeat the process. The traders’ game. Has nothing to do with science; all perceived psychology.
But a few of us have long AVXL positions as investments; long term. As I’ve stated before, I don’t intend to determine the profitability of my AVXL investment until 2023; when revenue streams should start to flow into corporate bank accounts.
But let me say, again. The presented science in the new paper is profound. A new central nervous system disease to (someday) add to the Anavex pipeline. I’m excited. My eventual returns from my moderate AVXL holding will be even bigger than I’ve previously projected.
Lastly, I could give some cautionary thoughts to parties who choose to short AVXL. But their games with AVXL are beyond what I can understand. I don’t understand shorting (don’t desire to). And they (so obviously) don’t understand the revealed neurobiology of the Anavex sigma-1 receptor agonists. To each....
In 2023, let’s see who wins.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_ms...=154016540
Fletch
falconer66a Tuesday, 02/25/20 05:39:09 PM
Re: plexrec post# 238474 0
Post # of 238487
The Data Are Profound
Quote:
-care to opine on this recent MS news Re:2-73 and MS
TIA
At first, I thought I’d go point by point, telling how the information and data in this peer-reviewed paper just so thoroughly substantiate the efficacy of blarcamesine (Anavex 2-73) as a treatment (or prevention) of multiple sclerosis (MS).
But I’ve done that sort of thing many times before; to no avail. Those who can understand the presented biology and chemistry in the paper will realize the many, so-favorable implications. My comments won’t change their perceptions (which are the same as mine).
(As previously, we all invite Anavex naysayers to pick apart the paper. The absence of such postings says everything, does it not?)
But for the majority of those reading (or at least skimming) the paper, what is being claimed will not be understood. It will be perceived as some sort of “pump the story” presentation. Some author(s) with letters after their names making all sorts of interesting claims about some new drug that can’t be sold or used to treat a single disease.
I have only two letters after my name (B.S.), with alternative interpretations. My presentation of details of the paper would be pretty much just a bit of entertainment. For those who know my professional perspectives on Anavex sciences, they already know that this new treatment target (of MS) will be both valid and profound. Not a thing in the paper to evoke concern. The mechanism(s) of action of blarcamesine are well described; not just plausible, but actual; now with multiple sclerosis.
But for most who read the messages here, the actual science of the Anavex molecules is only a side-story. Many, here, are traders, looking for the AVXL price to go up, whereupon it can be sold and profits taken. Presently, that crowd is scratching its heads wondering when to jump back in to repeat the process. The traders’ game. Has nothing to do with science; all perceived psychology.
But a few of us have long AVXL positions as investments; long term. As I’ve stated before, I don’t intend to determine the profitability of my AVXL investment until 2023; when revenue streams should start to flow into corporate bank accounts.
But let me say, again. The presented science in the new paper is profound. A new central nervous system disease to (someday) add to the Anavex pipeline. I’m excited. My eventual returns from my moderate AVXL holding will be even bigger than I’ve previously projected.
Lastly, I could give some cautionary thoughts to parties who choose to short AVXL. But their games with AVXL are beyond what I can understand. I don’t understand shorting (don’t desire to). And they (so obviously) don’t understand the revealed neurobiology of the Anavex sigma-1 receptor agonists. To each....
In 2023, let’s see who wins.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_ms...=154016540
(2)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
