Good day. Without going into gossip territory, I
Post# of 153898
(Total Views: 609)
Posted On: 09/06/2020 3:39:14 PM
Good day. Without going into gossip territory, I always wondered what was best for the relationship CytoDyn-IncellDx: Do we work together or separately ??
This is not an easy matter. I think BP can be the best speaker for CYDY there is. Has been working for decades with CCR5, has many publications, book chapters, director of virology at Stanford and so on … when he speaks everybody listens. And he is very good at communicating as well.
The work of both companies is synergistic in that CYDY approves and popularizes a drug in the market and IncellDX delivers the means to optimize its usage by providing pre, during and post treatment clinical follow up. IncellRx’s new Multiplex Cytokine Storm and CCR5 Receptor Occupancy Kits are a good example of this.
Both will profit greatly from an approval (FDA and/or overseas) and the world-wide widespread utilization of Leronlimab and this explains why Dr. Patterson has remained a staunch advocate of Leronlimab.
However, a close relationship will always elicit in some people the doubt: Is Dr. Patterson telling a scientific truth or promoting CYDY economic interests?
That is why imo some kind of respectful independence might be “convenient”. However, I think this is not the whole story as there is some animosity from NP towards BP and not the other way around. This I don’t understand but something went wrong along the way, either from the economical or involved egos perspective.
Whatever the case might be (and I hope NP patches it up with BP), we need Dr. Patterson paper published pronto. This is the best moment for publication: in an amazing turn of events NO drug has yet shown in double blinded trials benefit with COVID (except Biocon’s in India with Itolizumab with 20 patients in an open-label trial). As I have said before, by now I was expecting few drugs approved after proper trials, but COVID has demonstrated to be a very tough bone to gnaw.
Since Dr. Paterson’s preprint paper I have kept it in my desk opened in the page were the plots for reversal of immune dysfunction after leronlimab administration are. It keeps me calm in spite of SP variation as there is no way that we don’t get approved after showing these results.
The peer-reviewed paper publication will be the next step on LL acceptance in the medical community and will provide the FDA and the public at large with the scientific validation of WHY patients are improving the way they are. I know FDA says they don’t look at the numbers but just to the clinical outcomes, but heck, the measurements are part of the trial outcomes !!! If they repeat in the trial as they did in the paper (and Montefiore) we are gold.
I believe we are in for a very good surprise very soon: please Dr. Patterson, let’s publish the paper !!!!
This is not an easy matter. I think BP can be the best speaker for CYDY there is. Has been working for decades with CCR5, has many publications, book chapters, director of virology at Stanford and so on … when he speaks everybody listens. And he is very good at communicating as well.
The work of both companies is synergistic in that CYDY approves and popularizes a drug in the market and IncellDX delivers the means to optimize its usage by providing pre, during and post treatment clinical follow up. IncellRx’s new Multiplex Cytokine Storm and CCR5 Receptor Occupancy Kits are a good example of this.
Both will profit greatly from an approval (FDA and/or overseas) and the world-wide widespread utilization of Leronlimab and this explains why Dr. Patterson has remained a staunch advocate of Leronlimab.
However, a close relationship will always elicit in some people the doubt: Is Dr. Patterson telling a scientific truth or promoting CYDY economic interests?
That is why imo some kind of respectful independence might be “convenient”. However, I think this is not the whole story as there is some animosity from NP towards BP and not the other way around. This I don’t understand but something went wrong along the way, either from the economical or involved egos perspective.
Whatever the case might be (and I hope NP patches it up with BP), we need Dr. Patterson paper published pronto. This is the best moment for publication: in an amazing turn of events NO drug has yet shown in double blinded trials benefit with COVID (except Biocon’s in India with Itolizumab with 20 patients in an open-label trial). As I have said before, by now I was expecting few drugs approved after proper trials, but COVID has demonstrated to be a very tough bone to gnaw.
Since Dr. Paterson’s preprint paper I have kept it in my desk opened in the page were the plots for reversal of immune dysfunction after leronlimab administration are. It keeps me calm in spite of SP variation as there is no way that we don’t get approved after showing these results.
The peer-reviewed paper publication will be the next step on LL acceptance in the medical community and will provide the FDA and the public at large with the scientific validation of WHY patients are improving the way they are. I know FDA says they don’t look at the numbers but just to the clinical outcomes, but heck, the measurements are part of the trial outcomes !!! If they repeat in the trial as they did in the paper (and Montefiore) we are gold.
I believe we are in for a very good surprise very soon: please Dr. Patterson, let’s publish the paper !!!!
(14)
(0)