Square Pants has stated ... It’s a spec stock, we need...

Square Pants has stated ... It’s a spec stock, we need different opinions to encourage debate and test our comprehension.

I agree entirely SP ... if the debate is open and ‘honest’, and the debaters don’t cherry pick general, often distant, and sometimes even poorly understood concepts, to prop up their otherwise flawed view. This ‘challenge’ of course, may arrive on IMU threads for many reasons, and we need to understand that the poster likely has their own ‘interesting’ agenda.

Skimming through this thread I note that @GMT2 has had a shot at ‘unpacking’ the MAST data that we have at hand. Well done GMT and I commend you. You have had a shot at something we don’t see often see on these threads. Personally, I believe management, with all the scientific ‘fire power’ that they have, could also do this, with a deeper dive into the data, for curious and interested investors. If that were to actually happen, we wouldn’t so easily ‘feed the needs’ and serve the agendas of our regular visitor from the RAC threads.

I also commend @Jase99 for doing some more digging around psuedoprogression and sharing here.

I will add a couple of points about psuedoprogression for those with limited time and also for the benefit of our RAC ‘cherry-picker’ visitor.

Do you know that the medical community is not even totally agreed on what psuedoprogression is or how and when they may see it progresses? Or how it might be expressed in different cancers? Or that it might take months or even a year to diagnose or even misdiagnose? Think about this and what our team are wrestling with here! Our visitor from the RAC threads throws it out there as though it is a well understood indication, but fortunately for us, he is ‘totally across’ it and is happy to ‘teach us’. Very thoughtful of him.

I commend our RAC visitor for the amount of time he has spent ‘unpacking’ the data of a share he doesn’t actually hold. He has clearly spent more time doing this, and adding his own twist and interpretation, than most regular ‘holders’ here. So, credit given. But why, I have to ask?

Several years ago, I was also a RAC holder. I had engaged many times with the ‘founder’ of the company, and I had looked carefully at the ‘historical data’. And it certainly has a long history ... but no Big Pharma interest. And then I noted a number of things that I found very concerning ... so I took a modest profit and ran for the hills. The one thing I didn’t do was go back to the RAC threads to cast shade and, as a result, generate fear. Having said that I believe investors have a responsibility to do their own DD and understand their own risk-reward appetite (hint, hint). I wish RAC, and their patients, every success. I certainly don’t see their molecule as a threat to IMU’s OVs in any way. But this may be our ‘visitor’s’ issue ... he may well see our science as a threat. Who knows?

He also needs to ‘play fair’, but I have never seen too much of that in his posts here. I will concede that he has a good understanding of how Bisantrene works and its potential applications ... so he has a good following over on those threads. He clearly has far more time that I have, to chase, and then ‘cherry pick’ the science of other bio-techs.

The final point (as I just don’t have the time) I will make for our visitor is this ... the MAST trial is a Phase One trial. Yes, a Phase 1 .... looking primarily to show safety, and to ascertain the most effect dosage. It is not a Phase 2 or a Phase 3 trial trying for registration. We have only seen one data cut. It is early, early days, yet we are seeing wonderful ‘signals’ and responses, before we have even established the appropriate targets and the most effective dosage.

Also, I recently made an analogy, suggesting that the MAST trial was very much like a science ‘sandbox’. I’m not sure everyone understood what I meant. I believe the MAST study is being used to learn as much as possible about what CF33 does when it is in humans. This is why YF and LC have welcomed any cancer type !!! This trial should inform the team in so many ways. Which cancers to chase first, the dosages required, etc, etc. They recently noted the significance of, and I quote ... “patients with a higher level of T celldiversity in peripheral blood (pre-treatment) respond better to VAXINIA therapy, consistent with the known mechanism of action of oncolytic virotherapies and their ability to promote an anti-tumour T cell response.” This is what the trial is all about.

Having said that, I am waiting with considerable interest, to see what the next data cut reveals. I hope it is wonderful ... but its science ... and we may be disappointed. I don’t know, nor does our visitor from RAC. As I said, please do your own DD.

I will be trying to make this my last post for a while. I can spend my time on better things than responding to non-holding nuisances. I am currently moving house. What fun.

A final note ...

My thoughts go out to the families and friends who tragically lost loved ones at the Bondi Junction shopping centre. It is a jarring reminder to all, that our time on Earth is limited, and we should be doing everything we can to spend quality time with those we love.

Have a wonderful weekend. All of the above is my opinion.