Now let me take that line of thinking and your baton a bit forward.
On 28th April 2014 , OBJ has advised to the market previously that PG have funded 3 work plans. If PG is funding some of the plans then obviously this money should show up in quarterly right ?
Since this time if memory serves me correct OBJ has received less than 2 MIL including the R&D receipts. This humorously also includes the royalty for the first "soft launch" of the product and its royalty.
Bodyguard trial, conducted by Bill Vincenzo does not even mention double blinding. These boards at one point was filled with accolades and achievements of this individual and his conclusion on one of the other trials he did about tennis elbow was - do nothing !
A study by Prof. Bill Vincenzo and colleagues from School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences at The University of Queensland has provided a very interesting answer to the dilemma of how best to treat tennis elbow … do nothing!
Source
Interesting read on what Southoz thinks on this
trial. Makes for a very educating read certainly more than some cut/copy/paste job that gets passed on as research on these boards.
Code:
On the second primary outcome “The Kneeguard was also equivalent (ah so the AFS was equivalent?) to the Product for the sport and function components of the KOOS (knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score) questionnaire.”
This means presumably that kneeguard was not equivalent on the other four remaining sub-scales of the KOSS: Pain, Other symptoms, Function in daily living (ADL), and knee related Quality of life (QOL). And presumably not equivalent on KOOS total score.
And guess what. In the trial registration it is stated that the 5 KOOS sub-scales will be summed to produce a mean normalised overall score. And it was actually the KOOS total score that was used to power the study because this is a commonly used instrument with well-known properties.
And so it is the KOOS total score on which we live or die by here; it is the measure that the test of equivalence was to be based on. Not the AFS which is why an “equivalence” statement is not reported with respect to AFS.
And so if kneeguard was not equivalent to dico gel on the KOOS total score the trial failed to demonstrate equivalence.
It is not known how many people took part in the consumer study. A subset of trial participants because this was a “tack on”. Presumably biased towards happy campers. Can’t meaningfully interpret this.
The irritation problem would have put a dent in treatment compliance for kneeguard. Because as soon as a subject hits problems the first thing you do is stop the new treatment for them. You do not just mush on. This should have been picked up in the Leaderville “pilot” to the “pilot”.
So in a nutshell the trial failed to demonstrate equivalence of kneeguard to dico gel using the pre-specified measure (total KOOS scrore) and inferiority margin. If it had of OBJ would have stated this clearly and directly.
Moving forward
Was the Perth trial registered? Did it have Ethics approval? Were reputable researchers conducting it? Was the product even approved?
Nope, nope, nope, and nope.
See these 15K "Trials" are dime a dozen and for PG to validate and take these IP in OBJ dictionary would probably be a 10 year project.
There was another contention about the question asked by Smac in relation to dermaportation.
So is OBJ in the business of biotechnology or big data ? Last I checked this requirement requires an in-depth understanding of big data & machine intelligence neither of which OBJ has contributed to or have knowledge about. Why would they obviously they are a biotech.
Nopes wait. OBJ
knows that too as very directly implied via nudge nudge wink wink mechanisms.
Then there has always been the talk of a substantial holder. Let's see OBJ needs to do a CR and the CR is less likely to be supported if the retail sentiment is low. So what do you do ? You float the idea of a substantial holder in the next few weeks. Yup that prediction was made too.
There are quite a few holes that pop up once you go back and read some historical posts about certain individuals but that one is an exercise for a smart investor.
Have you ever seen a completely new registered user on Hot-copper that shows very in-depth understanding of a company, has information that is most likely missed by retail shareholder and only posts on that company alone ? Yup OBJ got a few of those too.
Lately I have started seeing a lot of people turn to see reality. Hopeful2 , desco , martin gifford , yourself , oc16 , jm69 and quite a few others. Now look at how many are incessantly positive about OBJ that have been here for a long time ? probably a couple.
I see that OBJ boards have yet to respond to my previous questions about show me "Peer reviewed material published by personnel
NOT associated with OBJ ? " . Questions being dogged ? Well why am I not surprised ?
(20min delay)