(Total Views: 751)
Posted On: 10/04/2021 9:36:55 PM
Post# of 154939
From the last 13d zoom call. They should pay heed to the admonition it is wiser to remain silent then speak and be shown a fool.
Patterson says Cytodyn says anyone can do the test that IncellDX does that's patently (maybe it would be wiser not to use that word) incorrect. For Covid-19 and longhaulers it's a cytokine panel a very common set of tests. He then goes on to say the laboratory Cytodyn was using couldn't do an immunohistochemistry assay for cancer. Except Dr. Hallgeir Rui is doing just that after Patterson failed to develop one so why does he feel the need to lie.
Because $350 million is a wee bit expensive.
Tests have been done since Cytodyn acquired Pro 140. Patterson's comment smacks of a justdafactss post. If I don't know of the existence of something even if I never bothered to look it doesn't exist.
He says Gaylis and Recknor use IncellDX's test via a reference laboratory that use their test. It's the CRO who decides what laboratory to use not Gaylis and Recknor. He then says they would have paid twice what they would have running it in house but earlier he said that Cytodyn wouldn't be paying IncellDX directly because they just sell assay tests to reference laboratories. So was he lying then or is he lying now.
Patterson says good luck on finding another laboratory to do it because CCR5 is a 7 transmembrane protein. He's just trying to bamboozle the uninformed. CCR5 receptor occupancy tests were done long before IncellDX even existed. His claim to Cytodyn was that his test would improve accuracy. It wasn't acceptable to the FDA so that would seem to be an unwarranted claim.
Patterson says Cytodyn says anyone can do the test that IncellDX does that's patently (maybe it would be wiser not to use that word) incorrect. For Covid-19 and longhaulers it's a cytokine panel a very common set of tests. He then goes on to say the laboratory Cytodyn was using couldn't do an immunohistochemistry assay for cancer. Except Dr. Hallgeir Rui is doing just that after Patterson failed to develop one so why does he feel the need to lie.
Quote:
Why should we keep going after cheap laboratories
Because $350 million is a wee bit expensive.
Quote:
We've never seen another laboratory running Cytodyn tests have we
Tests have been done since Cytodyn acquired Pro 140. Patterson's comment smacks of a justdafactss post. If I don't know of the existence of something even if I never bothered to look it doesn't exist.
He says Gaylis and Recknor use IncellDX's test via a reference laboratory that use their test. It's the CRO who decides what laboratory to use not Gaylis and Recknor. He then says they would have paid twice what they would have running it in house but earlier he said that Cytodyn wouldn't be paying IncellDX directly because they just sell assay tests to reference laboratories. So was he lying then or is he lying now.
Patterson says good luck on finding another laboratory to do it because CCR5 is a 7 transmembrane protein. He's just trying to bamboozle the uninformed. CCR5 receptor occupancy tests were done long before IncellDX even existed. His claim to Cytodyn was that his test would improve accuracy. It wasn't acceptable to the FDA so that would seem to be an unwarranted claim.
(20)
(0)
