What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***OFFICIAL CYDY/Leronlimab Thread*** (4 Viewers)

Found this on another board. 

WSJ did a correction regarding the CYDY article as follows

The Food and Drug Administration in July requested more information from CytoDyn Inc. about a drug-marketing application the company had submitted in April. A Business & Finance article Thursday about biotech companies incorrectly said the FDA refused to grant the license to CytoDyn.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/corrections-amplifications-11596850074?st=ywpfxarzdlflkgk&reflink=article_imessage_share

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Couple thoughts from the latest interview:

- he said statistically significant parameter, not parameters.  Thinking there is one here and the supporting endpoints are directionally good, but perhaps not at a p value for statistical significance.

- said they were at 175 enrolled patients and I believe it was 165 or so a week ago.  Thinking it is 2-3 more weeks to get that sample size finished up so they can start the 28 day clock on wrapping it.

- wondering if the continued paid PR is an effort to keep CYDY in the news and maybe help with patient recruitment?  Would think this is helpful to getting to that number quicker when they tout positive results.

- would love to hear what a body language expert thinks of NP during these interviews.  There is quite a bit of looking up, looking to the side, etc.  I’d love to know what a pro thinks of it as it relates to the truth vs salesmanship.

I don’t believe Whyatt’s early assessment that it is a long con, but he is definitely blowing sunshine around— the real question is to what purpose?  I get the sense he is walking a tightrope— trying to arrange and keep credit, lining up deals for distribution without giving away the house, giving enough reason for more people to sign on to trials, keeping the SP north of the Nasdaq uplift qualifier, trying to navigate FDA trials without the resources of BP, etc.  I wonder if the move into the Covid space was a calculated move to accelerate timing given the prior cash flow issues and a potential easing of regulatory restrictions given Covid or whether they legit felt the science would bear it out.  

 
PennState-JD said:
Couple thoughts from the latest interview:

-  would love to hear what a body language expert thinks of NP during these interviews.  There is quite a bit of looking up, looking to the side, etc.  I’d love to know what a pro thinks of it as it relates to the truth vs salesmanship. 
Click to expand...
Facial Cues The eyes: Someone who is lying might stare or look away at a crucial moment, says Glass — a possible sign they’re moving their eyes around as they try to think about what to say next.  The research conducted by Geiselman at UCLA corroborated this, finding that people sometimes look away briefly when lying. The 2015 study conducted by the University of Michigan also found that those who lied were more likely to stare than those who were truthful — so much so that 70% of the clips of people lying showed them staring directly at the people they were lying to.  There is still some debate over this, however. A 2012 study published in Plos One debunked the concept that people look in a specific direction when they are dishonest. And while there is a possibility of reading too much into someone’s mannerisms, Glass maintains that there is some truth to be gleamed from the eyes.

So if they stare at you or look away they're lying. Guess he's lying.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
PennState-JD said:
Couple thoughts from the latest interview:

- he said statistically significant parameter, not parameters.  Thinking there is one here and the supporting endpoints are directionally good, but perhaps not at a p value for statistical significance.

- said they were at 175 enrolled patients and I believe it was 165 or so a week ago.  Thinking it is 2-3 more weeks to get that sample size finished up so they can start the 28 day clock on wrapping it.

- wondering if the continued paid PR is an effort to keep CYDY in the news and maybe help with patient recruitment?  Would think this is helpful to getting to that number quicker when they tout positive results.

- would love to hear what a body language expert thinks of NP during these interviews.  There is quite a bit of looking up, looking to the side, etc.  I’d love to know what a pro thinks of it as it relates to the truth vs salesmanship.

I don’t believe Whyatt’s early assessment that it is a long con, but he is definitely blowing sunshine around— the real question is to what purpose?  I get the sense he is walking a tightrope— trying to arrange and keep credit, lining up deals for distribution without giving away the house, giving enough reason for more people to sign on to trials, keeping the SP north of the Nasdaq uplift qualifier, trying to navigate FDA trials without the resources of BP, etc.  I wonder if the move into the Covid space was a calculated move to accelerate timing given the prior cash flow issues and a potential easing of regulatory restrictions given Covid or whether they legit felt the science would bear it out.  
Click to expand...
Good post. Say your first point is true, what are we looking at for the stock price? Assume the PR they put out will be glowing of course. 

 
PennState-JD said:
Couple thoughts from the latest interview:

- he said statistically significant parameter, not parameters.  Thinking there is one here and the supporting endpoints are directionally good, but perhaps not at a p value for statistical significance.

- said they were at 175 enrolled patients and I believe it was 165 or so a week ago.  Thinking it is 2-3 more weeks to get that sample size finished up so they can start the 28 day clock on wrapping it.

- wondering if the continued paid PR is an effort to keep CYDY in the news and maybe help with patient recruitment?  Would think this is helpful to getting to that number quicker when they tout positive results.

- would love to hear what a body language expert thinks of NP during these interviews.  There is quite a bit of looking up, looking to the side, etc.  I’d love to know what a pro thinks of it as it relates to the truth vs salesmanship.

I don’t believe Whyatt’s early assessment that it is a long con, but he is definitely blowing sunshine around— the real question is to what purpose?  I get the sense he is walking a tightrope— trying to arrange and keep credit, lining up deals for distribution without giving away the house, giving enough reason for more people to sign on to trials, keeping the SP north of the Nasdaq uplift qualifier, trying to navigate FDA trials without the resources of BP, etc.  I wonder if the move into the Covid space was a calculated move to accelerate timing given the prior cash flow issues and a potential easing of regulatory restrictions given Covid or whether they legit felt the science would bear it out.  
Click to expand...
NP was raised in Iran til he was 14.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-you-lie-depends-on-where-you-re-from

A number of studies have shown that when people try to detect lies across cultures, they’re often throw off. One of the first studies to look at this problem, in 1990, had American and Jordanian students try to judge whether each other were lying. And while Americans could tell with some accuracy whether Americans were lying, when they tried to judge the Jordanians truthfulness, they did worse than if they had flipped a coin. And studies since have shown the same thing—figuring out if someone from a different place is lying is incredibly difficult.

“Indicators of lying in some cultures are indicators of truth in other cultures,” says Paul Taylor, a professor of psychology at Lancaster University. “We learn what’s suspicious behavior and what’s normal behavior, and we tend to associate the people who do the first with being slightly dodgy. And that’s a huge mistake if it’s with people from different culture.” 

And it turns out that there are some common behavioral patterns in what we think liars do. In 2006, when an international group of investigators, called the Global Deception Research Team, asked people 58 countries, “How can you tell when people are lying?” they found a remarkable degree of agreement.

“We were expecting to see all kinds of opinions,” says Hartwig. “The results were just incredibly consistent. The vast majority of cultures agreed that people look shady when they don’t look you in the eye, when they don’t move a lot and when they contradict themselves.”

In particular, people around the world agreed that liars would avert their gaze: 65 percent of the study respondents listed that as a sign of lying, and in 51 of 58 countries, they found that gaze aversion was “more prevalent than any other belief about lying.”

Too bad that all those people, across the world, are wrong about that: As the deception researcher David Matsumoto wrote a few years ago, “No scientific evidence exists to suggest that eye behavior or gaze aversion can gauge truthfulness reliably.”

 
Another good post from investors hangout 

Good morning folks. 

We had quite a few events last week, was traveling and just catch up with them. Wanted to share some thoughts (just imo): 

Results of CD10: several comments from NP and JL, safety and NEWS2 peeks would indicate we have some favorable results. The re-enforcement provided by NP, who by now should know a large parte of the analysis, by communicating the filing in UK/Europe would indicate these are very good. 

The question is: do we meet the primary end-point ? or rather, can we demonstrate efficacy in several areas as measured by other parameters rather than the originally designed primary-end-point?? This is a P2 trial, that is, the end-points for P3 can be adjusted, enlarged or limited depending on what was obtained (efficacy), provided we have something to work with. 

OK. Enough of this. So how does this affect us as investors?? Ideally FDA will say: "man this is soooo good", you are approved, please do a P4 as you sell the drug. This would possibly happen if we crush the p-value (in NP words) and show great secondary's. 

Reading between lines imo this is not the case. We will show therapeutic benefit, no doubt about that, but will need to go to P3 (with fine-tuned endpoints) and fight for EUA in the mean time. 

As investors I think we need to consider something very important: for the COVID indication time is of the essence, both for CYDY and, more importantly, for thousands of patients out there badly needing Leronlimab. 

P3 will require several 100's of patients. We will take few months to enroll and finalize this. There isn't time for that. 

Our safer and more productive route is, then, partner with BP (COVID only). 

Why???  

- We do the P3 trial quickly 
- We gain acceptance with FDA (this shouldn't be necessary, but, imo FDA is not playing, and has not been playing, fairly with us) 
-The most important gain is to "institutionalize" Leronlimab. Once is out there being used for COVID (approved) there is no stopping of-label usage and the acceptance of the veritable therapeutic benefit in other areas (which really are the big prize).  

This way COVID will be the door for HIV, NASH, PrEP, Oncology … the whole enchilada. 

Apart from rewarding all of us economically now. 

So, if FDA tries to continue with the same shenanigans a licensing or a partnership for COVID will be a good (and maybe the only) option. 

Nader: put the data in the idem room and start making phone calls

Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=5853859#ixzz6UX2q6JxS
Click to expand...
 
Capella said:
Hadn’t considered dealing with big pharma just for covid. That’s an excellent idea imo 
Click to expand...
We talked about this a month ago.  Try to partner with BP for covid only.  Let the PR people with that partner company do the interviews and marketing.  Cytodyn could then focus on the other indications going forward.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Moonlight said:
NP was raised in Iran til he was 14.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-you-lie-depends-on-where-you-re-from

A number of studies have shown that when people try to detect lies across cultures, they’re often throw off. One of the first studies to look at this problem, in 1990, had American and Jordanian students try to judge whether each other were lying. And while Americans could tell with some accuracy whether Americans were lying, when they tried to judge the Jordanians truthfulness, they did worse than if they had flipped a coin. And studies since have shown the same thing—figuring out if someone from a different place is lying is incredibly difficult.

“Indicators of lying in some cultures are indicators of truth in other cultures,” says Paul Taylor, a professor of psychology at Lancaster University. “We learn what’s suspicious behavior and what’s normal behavior, and we tend to associate the people who do the first with being slightly dodgy. And that’s a huge mistake if it’s with people from different culture.” 

And it turns out that there are some common behavioral patterns in what we think liars do. In 2006, when an international group of investigators, called the Global Deception Research Team, asked people 58 countries, “How can you tell when people are lying?” they found a remarkable degree of agreement.

“We were expecting to see all kinds of opinions,” says Hartwig. “The results were just incredibly consistent. The vast majority of cultures agreed that people look shady when they don’t look you in the eye, when they don’t move a lot and when they contradict themselves.”

In particular, people around the world agreed that liars would avert their gaze: 65 percent of the study respondents listed that as a sign of lying, and in 51 of 58 countries, they found that gaze aversion was “more prevalent than any other belief about lying.”

Too bad that all those people, across the world, are wrong about that: As the deception researcher David Matsumoto wrote a few years ago, “No scientific evidence exists to suggest that eye behavior or gaze aversion can gauge truthfulness reliably.”
Click to expand...
Malcolm Gladwell's most recent book talked about that in context with Amanda Knox and the murder of her roommate in Italy. It was pretty interesting. 

 
Who the hell knows anything with these guys but I don’t take the sudden interest in the UK as a good sign.

A month ago Mexico was the rage and then suddenly dead.  Seemed like some crazy dumb clerical or communication errors.  NP said they are a small team and don’t have time, if we get FDA on board the rest will come.  Seemed kinda logical, actually seemed confident in FDA progress.

Now fast forward and they have seen additional data, met with DSMC, I can only presume have a conversation or two with the FDA...and suddenly decide they have the resources again to try other countries?  Doesn’t jive.  Why did Mexico really not go forward?

So maybe they know they have the nuts and are lining up more countries for more revenue...when they don’t even have enough product for the US.  Or maybe they know the result in the US is going to be less than ideal so throwing throwing LL against the wall elsewhere and hope it sticks (aka desperation)

The latter seems much more plausible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
djmich said:
Who the hell knows anything with these guys but I don’t take the sudden interest in the UK as a good sign.

A month ago Mexico was the rage and then suddenly dead.  Seemed like some crazy dumb clerical or communication errors.  NP said they are a small team and don’t have time, if we get FDA on board the rest will come.  Seemed kinda logical, actually seemed confident in FDA progress.

Now fast forward and they have seen additional data, met with DSMC, I can only presume have a conversation or two with the FDA...and suddenly decide they have the resources again to try other countries?  Doesn’t jive.  Why did Mexico really not go forward?

So maybe they know they have the nuts and are lining up more countries for more revenue when they don’t even have enough product for the US.  Or maybe they know the result in the US is going to be less than ideal so throwing throwing LL against the wall elsewhere and hope it sticks.

The latter seems much more plausible.
Click to expand...
This is exactly where I landed on this.  Its another deflection at a time when you wouldn't expect to need one (assuming results are going to be good)

Im a little concerned.

That and that NP is talking about one parameter.  Feel like they are working real hard to tell a story about one statistically significant parameter.  Definitely not a home run.  Phase 3 trial is probably as good as its gonna get.

I do like the BP angle that Capella posted though, I'm on board with that at any point.  An outright buyout is fine with me.

 
Jayrok said:
We talked about this a month ago.  Try to partner with BP for covid only.  Let the PR people with that partner company do the interviews and marketing.  Cytodyn could then focus on the other indications going forward.  
Click to expand...
Think it would be a grand slam idea. So we’ll probably never see it happen.

 
djmich said:
Who the hell knows anything with these guys but I don’t take the sudden interest in the UK as a good sign.

A month ago Mexico was the rage and then suddenly dead.  Seemed like some crazy dumb clerical or communication errors.  NP said they are a small team and don’t have time, if we get FDA on board the rest will come.  Seemed kinda logical, actually seemed confident in FDA progress.

Now fast forward and they have seen additional data, met with DSMC, I can only presume have a conversation or two with the FDA...and suddenly decide they have the resources again to try other countries?  Doesn’t jive.  Why did Mexico really not go forward?

So maybe they know they have the nuts and are lining up more countries for more revenue...when they don’t even have enough product for the US.  Or maybe they know the result in the US is going to be less than ideal so throwing throwing LL against the wall elsewhere and hope it sticks (aka desperation)

The latter seems much more plausible.
Click to expand...
I think this is definitely plausible but their PR did blow more smoke about the top line report. So let’s say this guy is just a major exaggerator or a liar - that report is (theoretically) coming out in a week — why continue to lie when the lie will just be exposed in a few days? That’s the part that makes me somewhat believe him. 

 
Capella said:
why continue to lie when the lie will just be exposed in a few days? That’s the part that makes me somewhat believe him. 
Click to expand...
Logically this makes sense.  He would have to be a complete sociopath to continue lying knowing the results are coming soon.  

There are so many mixed signals here.

 
Hes only saying one parameter now though.  So Im sure he's not lying about this parameter..  Does he have the right read on how significant it is or is caught up in own world of excitement. IDK

 
Dwayne Hoover said:
Logically this makes sense.  He would have to be a complete sociopath to continue lying knowing the results are coming soon.  

There are so many mixed signals here.
Click to expand...
He could be a total sociopath. But there are a lot of people attached to the company who probably are not, so we’ll see. 
 

This is all very interesting. Excited to see where the week goes. 

 
Capella said:
I think this is definitely plausible but their PR did blow more smoke about the top line report. So let’s say this guy is just a major exaggerator or a liar - that report is (theoretically) coming out in a week — why continue to lie when the lie will just be exposed in a few days? That’s the part that makes me somewhat believe him. 
Click to expand...
So yes, good question.  First let me say I hope you are right.

For me, my bull#### meter has passed the acceptability range over the past few weeks.

The thing with NP is, I’m not sure if he is capable of accepting the truth and for him this is his “religion”.  I don’t think he can accept it might not be what he thinks and he will rationalize any data possible to prove that and will surround himself with people who only will think similarly.

Its not lying if you believe it.

I actually think that’s undeniable.  Doesn’t mean he still didn’t find the holy grail....but um, ugh.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been reading about the NEWS2 predictive model that is used a lot in the UK and Europe.  I think the premise of NEWS2 is that they are able to use 5 measureables (systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, pulse rate, temperature, and oxygen saturation), and compare them to a baseline score to determine whether or not the patient is likely to get more sick or recover.

I thought I heard in a previous PR that NP or one of the other doctors was saying that LL really aides in all 5 of the measurables for NEWS2.  Basically, if NEWS2 is a great predictor in patient outcome, and LL is great at keeping all the physiological measures close to the baseline, then patients should stay healthier.  I wonder if they will try to use this logic to gain access to the UK and EU?

 
I have muted at least 20 posters on Yahoo board.

But was just on the yahoo board and did find a post by a guy named Frank that was persuasive and optimistic for me:

A lot of chatting below on endpoints..... Some people here do not want or just don‘t can understand that the purpose of a phase II trial (like the M/M trial) is not to show statistical significance of a primary endpoint, but is to explore efficacy by looking for several endpoints (just as Gilead did. for Remdesivir) and to also to collect more safety data.

The key is to show the mode of action (e.g. changes in immunological endpoints, cytokines, T-helper cells, viral load in blood etc). And that these changes come with some relevant benefits in these patients. That is all what we need now in Covid. And that is why Gilead got approval on the 4th or 5th secondary endpoint („hospital stay duration). For Remdesivir they could not even link a mode of action with this health outcome (Remdesivir did not even change viral load compared to placebo). I am sure this link can be show for leronlimab (like it did for the HIV trials).

In addition FDA and European Medicine Authorities will also consider the safety data from the > 800 Patients of the HIV phase III trial, and even the anectodal information (there is even a place where to put such information in BLA And also European Medicine authorisation Dossiers).

And finally by the time when FDA, the britisch and the European Medicine Agency (EMA) will assess the M/M data, the interim analyses from the S/C will become available.

FDA and others at the end look to the total evidence for efficacy and the anticipated benefits for the patients versus the risk (possible side effects). The later cannot be any better. We are going straight to approval in the US and EU. We have much more, better data, a proven node of action, all together much more convincing than Remdesivir. It will be approved soon. Politics? Lobby? The pressure is still high to provide an effective drug after the failure of jydrochloroquinone and now with more and more reports coming from the hospitals that Remdesivir does not cause anything but side effects. And if Trump wants to re-elected, he will rather push towards approval than block it.

Less

 
Moonlight said:
IAnd finally by the time when FDA, the britisch and the European Medicine Agency (EMA) will assess the M/M data, the interim analyses from the S/C will become available.
Click to expand...
Some good food for thought.  On this part though I thought we figured out that the interim analysis is at least a month away.

 
Moonlight said:
I have muted at least 20 posters on Yahoo board.

But was just on the yahoo board and did find a post by a guy named Frank that was persuasive and optimistic for me:

A lot of chatting below on endpoints..... Some people here do not want or just don‘t can understand that the purpose of a phase II trial (like the M/M trial) is not to show statistical significance of a primary endpoint, but is to explore efficacy by looking for several endpoints (just as Gilead did. for Remdesivir) and to also to collect more safety data.

The key is to show the mode of action (e.g. changes in immunological endpoints, cytokines, T-helper cells, viral load in blood etc). And that these changes come with some relevant benefits in these patients. That is all what we need now in Covid. And that is why Gilead got approval on the 4th or 5th secondary endpoint („hospital stay duration). For Remdesivir they could not even link a mode of action with this health outcome (Remdesivir did not even change viral load compared to placebo). I am sure this link can be show for leronlimab (like it did for the HIV trials).

In addition FDA and European Medicine Authorities will also consider the safety data from the > 800 Patients of the HIV phase III trial, and even the anectodal information (there is even a place where to put such information in BLA And also European Medicine authorisation Dossiers).

And finally by the time when FDA, the britisch and the European Medicine Agency (EMA) will assess the M/M data, the interim analyses from the S/C will become available.

FDA and others at the end look to the total evidence for efficacy and the anticipated benefits for the patients versus the risk (possible side effects). The later cannot be any better. We are going straight to approval in the US and EU. We have much more, better data, a proven node of action, all together much more convincing than Remdesivir. It will be approved soon. Politics? Lobby? The pressure is still high to provide an effective drug after the failure of jydrochloroquinone and now with more and more reports coming from the hospitals that Remdesivir does not cause anything but side effects. And if Trump wants to re-elected, he will rather push towards approval than block it.

Less
Click to expand...
Who has two thumbs and is buying more on Monday? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
More from the guy on yahoo that moonlighted posted above: 

Thanks for all the positive feed back. I think I mentioned already that I worked for 4 years in virology (where you always also gain some knowledge about immunology, biotech and vaccines, antiviral drugs). After these 4 years I worked first for the national Drug Authority of an EU member state and then for the European Medicine Agency (EMA) which moved from London (Brexit) to London.

The scientific assessment at EMA is strictly separated from Member State influence. That is why I have high confidence that EMA will do a great job also on leronlimab. The scientific requirements (under normal non- Covid conditions) are basically the same as of FDA (EU, US, Japan, and most other first world countries follow ICH Guidance document = International Conference for Harmonisation). I also had good contacts to FDA people. That is why I also have confidence that also here for Leronlimab (and the patients) FDA will do a good job. Obviously I also do not possess the detailed results of the M/M trial and interim data of the ongoing S/C trial. That is why I could not say that approval is granted here. I am optimistic and believe in CYDY, it’s CEO and most important in the science of leronlimab, but no guarantee here (that is why we still buy for a reasonable good price which other people wished they did on some weeks time from now.

What is „granted“ Is the approval of HIV. Such great data will definitely pass successfully the FDA and also EMA, zero doubt about that. Leronlimab will become the standard therapy against HIV.

Alone this is big reason why those big Pharma which now sell the multi drug cocktail for HIV treatment (multi Bio business) will go to get CYDY. But this is a chapter to come in 2021. That is an additional reason why I hope also for Covid - that would make any attempt to take over CYDY much more expensive. When this time will come, Nadar P will face another big challenge. So far he did fantastic. Any doubt ? See stock chart back 2or 3 years !
Click to expand...
 
Capella said:
Good post. Say your first point is true, what are we looking at for the stock price? Assume the PR they put out will be glowing of course. 
Click to expand...
I think the SP will continue to float where it is now, and will jump on this news depending on which endpoint is statistically significant.  If they can demonstrate a reduction in mortality, I think that is best case because that would be the indicator that should be easiest to monetize and get to market faster.  I am no pro, but the speculation alone would take it back in the 8-10 range (IMO).  Of course, AF and the shorts will be on it again and it likely drifts back as they wait for Phase 3.  I really don’t see Phase 3 being skipped.  On the plus side, the news events are uplifting, a Phase 3 approval or a deal with BP.  The downside events are being denied Phase 3 (doubt that happens) or a competitor beating them to the punch.  I think moving to Phase 3 provides a short term boost but then back to where things are today. 

 
PennState-JD said:
I think the SP will continue to float where it is now, and will jump on this news depending on which endpoint is statistically significant.  If they can demonstrate a reduction in mortality, I think that is best case because that would be the indicator that should be easiest to monetize and get to market faster.  I am no pro, but the speculation alone would take it back in the 8-10 range (IMO).  Of course, AF and the shorts will be on it again and it likely drifts back as they wait for Phase 3.  I really don’t see Phase 3 being skipped.  On the plus side, the news events are uplifting, a Phase 3 approval or a deal with BP.  The downside events are being denied Phase 3 (doubt that happens) or a competitor beating them to the punch.  I think moving to Phase 3 provides a short term boost but then back to where things are today. 
Click to expand...
I do think we should see a bump after the PR. How many investors even know what an emergency use authorization is? Sometimes I think we overplay that here. 

 
Latest CYDY soap opera developments

Someone contacted Olive, who is the woman managing Holly Kennedy's Go Fund Me, to throw shade on LL. Other boards are alleging it was AF. Here is what Olive posted on the funding site today:

Hi everyone.

I am back again.


To explain my comments from earlier.....
I recieved am email from a magazine last night suggesting the below.


"What evidence is there that leronlimab has helped her?
Do you know if Holly pursued treatment with Trodelvy, for instance, which was recently approved in the U.S. for advanced TNBC?
Are you worried at all that you and Holly are being exploited by people promoting leronlimab and CytoDyn for financial reasons?
I'd like to speak with you if you have time.
Thank you --"

To be clear-
I merely set up a fund to help my friend in her chosen trial drug, to help lengthen her life.
This is Hollys trial drug of choice.
Comments and emails like the above are undermining , decisive and unhelpful.


I hope you understand that from here on in, I will not reply to emails from magazines , medical or otherwise.

I will do a video on this matter during the week .

Big love
Olive
#leronlimab continues... Week 7 of a year long trial

TODAYby Olive O'Sullivan, Organizer

This photo earlier this week have me such joy and I am sure it did to you .

Holly came home following three weeks in hospital, zapping by radiotherapy to the cancer metastasis in her vertabrae that was diagnosed three days after returning from San Francisco.

Her three weeks in hospital helped titrate her pain meds, get her 5 radiotherapy sessions done, and get her comfortable enough to return home and continue her drug trial #leronlimab.
Leronlimab is administered by Holly twice a week every week - part of a year long trial that she has chosen to be on , after discussion with her oncologist.
This is purely her porogative , and her decision following a suitability score with the drug company Cytodyn.

The updates are from me - the fund manager and updated out of courtesy and gratitude to anyone who kindly donated to our lovely Holly.
The narrative is not my personal point of view .
It just happens that I am a Nurse/Midwife , but i this role I am co ordinating the fund.

 
Capella said:
Jesus. What is that guy’s deal. 
Click to expand...
He’s obviously getting paid. No one would care that much without a vested interest and I’d assume he couldn’t possibly be actually shorting the stock. I was assuming he was behind the WSJ article since it seemed like a rehash. I’m with you at this point. While I’d love LeBron to be the de facto therapeutic, I just want something and it’s sad that still this many thousands of deaths later we’re still stuck with the same stuff that was railroaded through and isn’t really helping. I think doctors knowing how to care for patients has had more effect on death rates than Remdesivir and Hydroxychloronique or however you spell it.

 
stbugs said:
He’s obviously getting paid. No one would care that much without a vested interest and I’d assume he couldn’t possibly be actually shorting the stock. I was assuming he was behind the WSJ article since it seemed like a rehash. I’m with you at this point. While I’d love LeBron to be the de facto therapeutic, I just want something and it’s sad that still this many thousands of deaths later we’re still stuck with the same stuff that was railroaded through and isn’t really helping. I think doctors knowing how to care for patients has had more effect on death rates than Remdesivir and Hydroxychloronique or however you spell it.
Click to expand...
We should try supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, tbh. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wadegarrett
***Official OHIO STATE-MICHIGAN Thread***
40 41 42
Replies
2K
Views
52K
Blue Dot Orange Dot
B
Bob Magaw
*** Official 2011 St. Louis Rams Thread ***
Replies
21
Views
2K
Bob Magaw
Bob Magaw
Couch Potato
Couch Potato 2012 Dynasty Rankings
4 5 6
Replies
293
Views
40K
Spin
Spin

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top