I did read all of your post pledge. I don't read all of all of...

I did read all of your post pledge. I don't read all of all of your posts.


Hypothetically - if MSB gets a CRL on 7 January - what do you think the price will drop down too?
Is 31 cents too low do you think - a reverse 5 bagger ?

If you knew for a near certainty that MSB was going to get a CRL (right on the pdufa date) would you know how to profit from that? LED I suspect would know the mechanisms - but she is betting the other way.

Its ironic the india or pakistani sounding nick starting with R thinks you are a day trader - when most of the mouthy MSB longs are traders from their own comments.

I see this - post- as related to CYP because I think a converse of pfeifer's argument that a first approval is good for CYP is trie - I see another MSB CRL as not being good for CYP. All the nearology - a rising tide lifts all boards - will think the tide has gone out.

I think there are so many retail holders that are in the clueless believer category that they will think bad news - scary - we must run from this and hide from this and woe is us.

I have found the wayback machine ODAC transcripts. Still online. I don't need them for myself as I still have electonic copied and hardcopies I downloaded.

But I posted a lengthy explanation of why IL2 couldn't be the potency assay its IL2 r alpha - and I confirmed that is what it was both in MSBs ODAC papers and in FDA reply and discussion and then I found that Steve Bauer has largely confirmed (I"d forgotten what he said about other donors being needed) I'm doing my analysis now from an understanding of the science.

I saw the Kilian presentation - he has updated the old slide about the standard or convention way of getting cells to be much the same - but he is now - newly - differently - talking about variable donors.

Its like he is reading what I write. - Who has been talking about the donor exposure (that not having different donors could constitute a weakness in MSBs potency assay validation AND its having an adequate controlled trial more (I know of no-one) ?