A lesson in deductive reasoning (and for those of
Post# of 5066
Posted On: 09/25/2013 11:08:31 AM
A lesson in deductive reasoning (and for those of you that don't know what that means, to cite Wiki):
Deductive reasoning:
Quote:
is the process of reasoning from one or more general statements (premises) to reach a logically certain conclusion.
NOW, THAT SAID, to quote this morning's PR:
Quote:
Currently in our pipeline we have two products under development, HemaXellerate (a treatment for aplastic anemia) and now dCellVax (a cancer immuno-therapeutic). I believe these two areas represent a solid foundation for our company .
Does that say "currently we have ONE product in the pipeline"? No, it says they have TWO products in the pipeline. One of which is HemaXellerate.
To quote PG's 18 September post:
Quote:
Quote:
Rules 4310(c)(16) and 4320(e)(14) require that, except in unusual circumstances,
Nasdaq issuers disclose promptly to the public through any Regulation FD compliant
method (or combination of methods) of disclosure any material information which would
reasonably be expected to affect the value of their securities or influence investors’
decisions. Nasdaq issuers shall notify Nasdaq of the release of such material information
that involves any of the events set forth below prior to its release to the public. Nasdaq
recommends that Nasdaq issuers provide such notification at least ten minutes before
such release.2
Under unusual circumstances issuers may not be required to make public
disclosure of material events; for example, where it is possible to maintain confidentiality
of those events and immediate public disclosure would prejudice the ability of the
company to pursue its legitimate corporate objectives. However, Nasdaq issuers remain
obligated to disclose this information to Nasdaq upon request pursuant to Rules
4310(c)(15) or 4320(e)(13).
Given what BMSN has had to face with the manipulation, the screw up by Oregon State University and that they have to make some modifications to ensure their patented treatment is 100% PROTECTED by the crooks-at-large (and that includes some BP), they could very well already have approval and have appealed to the SEC to withhold this information while they make certain their property is fully protected.
If it were me, I would certainly appeal to the SEC for with holding this information as the circumstances surrounding so much with this warrant taking every step humanly possible to protect what they have worked so hard to see a reality.
I am liking the constant changes in the Google return for HemaXellerate within the FDA database.
Also, the FDA would allow so much time for the company to address the legal issues before the approval is accessible to the public by way of the FDA database. This is generally established ahead of time. However, there have been extraordinary events that have transpired since the original IND application submission.
A denial however would have to be disclosed within four days. No ifs ands or buts about it. There is nothing about disclosing such that would put the company's objectives in harms way if released. Well, there is obviously. But none that the SEC care about. If there were a denial, we would know within four days.
****The underline is placed by me.
Using deductive reasoning, is it not safe to say that HEMAXELLERATE is a PRODUCT that is soon to see HUMAN TRIALS ? Or, very well may be setting up for such now.
BMSN
OTCD, SG, TJ, & a many others...POS!!!!!!!!
Deductive reasoning:
Quote:
is the process of reasoning from one or more general statements (premises) to reach a logically certain conclusion.
NOW, THAT SAID, to quote this morning's PR:
Quote:
Currently in our pipeline we have two products under development, HemaXellerate (a treatment for aplastic anemia) and now dCellVax (a cancer immuno-therapeutic). I believe these two areas represent a solid foundation for our company .
Does that say "currently we have ONE product in the pipeline"? No, it says they have TWO products in the pipeline. One of which is HemaXellerate.
To quote PG's 18 September post:
Quote:
Quote:
Rules 4310(c)(16) and 4320(e)(14) require that, except in unusual circumstances,
Nasdaq issuers disclose promptly to the public through any Regulation FD compliant
method (or combination of methods) of disclosure any material information which would
reasonably be expected to affect the value of their securities or influence investors’
decisions. Nasdaq issuers shall notify Nasdaq of the release of such material information
that involves any of the events set forth below prior to its release to the public. Nasdaq
recommends that Nasdaq issuers provide such notification at least ten minutes before
such release.2
Under unusual circumstances issuers may not be required to make public
disclosure of material events; for example, where it is possible to maintain confidentiality
of those events and immediate public disclosure would prejudice the ability of the
company to pursue its legitimate corporate objectives. However, Nasdaq issuers remain
obligated to disclose this information to Nasdaq upon request pursuant to Rules
4310(c)(15) or 4320(e)(13).
Given what BMSN has had to face with the manipulation, the screw up by Oregon State University and that they have to make some modifications to ensure their patented treatment is 100% PROTECTED by the crooks-at-large (and that includes some BP), they could very well already have approval and have appealed to the SEC to withhold this information while they make certain their property is fully protected.
If it were me, I would certainly appeal to the SEC for with holding this information as the circumstances surrounding so much with this warrant taking every step humanly possible to protect what they have worked so hard to see a reality.
I am liking the constant changes in the Google return for HemaXellerate within the FDA database.
Also, the FDA would allow so much time for the company to address the legal issues before the approval is accessible to the public by way of the FDA database. This is generally established ahead of time. However, there have been extraordinary events that have transpired since the original IND application submission.
A denial however would have to be disclosed within four days. No ifs ands or buts about it. There is nothing about disclosing such that would put the company's objectives in harms way if released. Well, there is obviously. But none that the SEC care about. If there were a denial, we would know within four days.
****The underline is placed by me.
Using deductive reasoning, is it not safe to say that HEMAXELLERATE is a PRODUCT that is soon to see HUMAN TRIALS ? Or, very well may be setting up for such now.
BMSN
OTCD, SG, TJ, & a many others...POS!!!!!!!!
(0)
(0)