Does anyone on the message board know the "scienti
Post# of 30067
Posted On: 11/07/2014 12:17:23 PM
Does anyone on the message board know the "scientific reasons" Dr. Urano has put our "recombinant" MANF patent on the back burner while he explores the "small molecule" method of stimulating the natural production of MANF within the body to treat wolframs? (Urano blog Sept. 27th or 28th)
My understanding is that when Urano refers to the "small molecule" method of stimulating MANF in the body, that is a method that doesn't include our patented "recombinant" MANF which we manufacture and then inject into a patient to treat a disease.
In the last month or so, Dr. Urano is saying he prefers the "small molecule" method over the "recombinant" MANF injection.
Dr. Urano has tested MANF perhaps more than anyone. If he is saying he prefers a different method than ours of triggering MANF in the body, shouldn't that be something we discuss on the message board?
If his current preference for the "small molecule" method holds true for wolframs, does that mean it might hold true for all the other indications we're targeting MANF for: Parkinsons, Retinitis, Diabetes, TBI, etc, etc?
Someone with more of a science background needs to weigh in on this.
My understanding is that when Urano refers to the "small molecule" method of stimulating MANF in the body, that is a method that doesn't include our patented "recombinant" MANF which we manufacture and then inject into a patient to treat a disease.
In the last month or so, Dr. Urano is saying he prefers the "small molecule" method over the "recombinant" MANF injection.
Dr. Urano has tested MANF perhaps more than anyone. If he is saying he prefers a different method than ours of triggering MANF in the body, shouldn't that be something we discuss on the message board?
If his current preference for the "small molecule" method holds true for wolframs, does that mean it might hold true for all the other indications we're targeting MANF for: Parkinsons, Retinitis, Diabetes, TBI, etc, etc?
Someone with more of a science background needs to weigh in on this.
(0)
(0)