The story keeps looking better thanks to you guys and your research. From Hottods original post the statement below from mr Hayes did answer my question, i guess i just couldn't see it at the time. Our approach is not AAV or viral vector. Seems the company you refer to above hottod will likely have the same issues as the ones you originally described that had poor results with aav and resulted in negative market response for gene therapy. It seems we are showing fpp technology that is "relatively" simple to integrate for end user and theoretically is free of the possible immune responses triggered by aav method. With this in mind data that backs this up will be very valuable indeed in negotiations. thanks Waynesworld hottod and sot for your info. Sorry im so slow getting it but very exciting and i guess this is just one avenue.
From Mr Hayes "There’s no complex chemistry, and unlike nanoparticles or viruses, it’s not expensive or difficult, and there are no threats of immunogenicity or toxicity. Indeed, every one of Phylogica’s Cas9-FPP molecules comes with its very own built-in delivery system. But the real advantage of our technology is cell-specificity. We showed in earlier work that we can find FPPs that are specific for certain cells types (e.g., brain endothelial cells). The delivery of CRIPSPr/Cas9 to specific cell types and tissues is a clear and valuable advantage that Phylogica’s FPPs can provide."
PYC Price at posting:
2.8¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)