the govt contractor spoken of in the march 16 update either disappeared-the most likely -or is the calif biotesting firm
big boys like govt contractors dont usually get big by being nice in this upside down world-they have limitless tricks to fool destroy capture upend small operators-using their power to take advantage, as in, 'take the nonsense we want to shove down your throat or leave it'.
Small operators who succumb soon lose control and are effectively overcome/smothered or destroyed. So far evidence indicates NNLX has not been willing to play that short-lived game-which is good in the long run or NNLX would've been destroyed long ago.
According to all the local Ohio newspaper articles Bret created the new test (possibly in phone collaboration with Faros?).
If the March govt contractor did Bret et al would not have claimed ownership of such-given the thousands of lawyers at the beck and call of large companies - Bret is said to be an inventor.
you have already guessed who the Houston lab is and you may be right. The CA testing firm is either the govt contractor(see above) or the CA company recently associated w NNLX (most likely) or somebody new.
the 6-3-20 PR apparently didnt drum up any new parties -and I've previously addressed possible reasons for such
if the CA company is the previous CA association then at least that gives the CA testing firm a leg up compared to a new company
so a month after the 6-3 PR NNLX went ahead with the current 2 NDA parties-seethe 7-3? update.
Some have been concerned re the waiting period of the final patent - I have not bc the force of IP law behind a provisional patent is the same as the final patent-and at any rate the patent should be finalized in October
a litany of tests will continue to exist and any near term vaccines are not likely to be any more effective than other flu vaccines, as per articles, so testing will be needed for the foreseeable future
big bio firms are more secretive than many governments, which is part of the problem, and many large companies don't want to be publicly linked until circumstances force such
the one month plus and 3 month timelines start with the date of the update that announces such
the uk partnership testing is apparently continuing
big boys like govt contractors dont usually get big by being nice in this upside down world-they have limitless tricks to fool destroy capture upend small operators-using their power to take advantage, as in, 'take the nonsense we want to shove down your throat or leave it'.
Small operators who succumb soon lose control and are effectively overcome/smothered or destroyed. So far evidence indicates NNLX has not been willing to play that short-lived game-which is good in the long run or NNLX would've been destroyed long ago.
According to all the local Ohio newspaper articles Bret created the new test (possibly in phone collaboration with Faros?).
If the March govt contractor did Bret et al would not have claimed ownership of such-given the thousands of lawyers at the beck and call of large companies - Bret is said to be an inventor.
you have already guessed who the Houston lab is and you may be right. The CA testing firm is either the govt contractor(see above) or the CA company recently associated w NNLX (most likely) or somebody new.
the 6-3-20 PR apparently didnt drum up any new parties -and I've previously addressed possible reasons for such
if the CA company is the previous CA association then at least that gives the CA testing firm a leg up compared to a new company
so a month after the 6-3 PR NNLX went ahead with the current 2 NDA parties-seethe 7-3? update.
Some have been concerned re the waiting period of the final patent - I have not bc the force of IP law behind a provisional patent is the same as the final patent-and at any rate the patent should be finalized in October
a litany of tests will continue to exist and any near term vaccines are not likely to be any more effective than other flu vaccines, as per articles, so testing will be needed for the foreseeable future
big bio firms are more secretive than many governments, which is part of the problem, and many large companies don't want to be publicly linked until circumstances force such
the one month plus and 3 month timelines start with the date of the update that announces such
the uk partnership testing is apparently continuing
4
