global leader, page-40

I guess the issue with Janssen is that we have proven the EET benefits, and we have proven that some treatments can be made 25 to 50 times more effective. The only thing we don't appear to have done is named the actual phylomer that is the answer to all Janssens requirements. I guess this continues to show we have some great technology for testing and proving efficiency of phylomers but until we find the actual phylomer that unlocks a particular Janssen requirement then there will be no license. I assume they would license a particular phylomer, not the technology to find it. If they are going to comit to a license i'm sure they will want to test it to nth degree first?

I wonder how far the EET is actually proven. At the start of the update in March it refers

"In conjunction with Janssen, Phylogica has been making significant progress towards validation of one of its proprietary technology – the Endosomal Escape Trap (EET), to discover novel cell penetrating peptides"

Later in the same report

"Having validated its novel platform for discovery of functionally active delivery
reagents the company is actively pursuing expressions of interest from multiple potential
partners."

Is the technology actually validated or still in development. It appears from the majority of the shareholder update that research and testing is producing some interesting results, but if they are still testing does that mean it isn't validated.

It is frustrating that they can keep saying they are talking to multiple interested parties without any requirement to provide proof. That has been the issue for years. If results appeared years ago when they first used this line it might impress, but now it seems like a cynical cut and paste that they know they will not have to prove.