RE:IMV is like a box of chocolates. All biotech looks like a box of chocolate, reality though a rollercoaster ride that could fall apart at any moment.
If this was BS I don't expect the NRC would step in with more support. There has to be something concrete here. Look the challenge studies is something new to contemplate. They are a great tool to measure efficacy pre-clinically. Good animal models didn't exist apr/May. Now they do exist. The regulators have an obligation to keep up with the science, from that perspective I can see them dropping this on IMV (and all subsequent developers) just for that reason alone.
The novelty of IMV's approach could be weighing on them also. Most other vaccine are whole Spike protein, IMV just have peptides. Inevitably their results will look different, Is "different" good or bad? A good tool like a challenge study is going to shed light on that question.
If the data was just looking bad and they've been sent off to improve it I don't know the NRC would be handing out cash and services in that scenario.
The vaccine landscape is moving fast, the science is moving fast, it's not unreasonable to think the regulators are moving with it. Challenge studies look like a new hurdle that didn't exist several months ago, most of the leading vaccine did their challenge studies alongside the first-in-human trials. The goalpost look like they've moved to me.
Maybe the biggest fault was starting this process 2 months after everybody else. Maybe that fact just keeps coming back to bite them on the a$$.
It would be nice for them to give us the neutralizing antibody titers to show the promise in the tech, something like that would maybe show us that there aren't problems with their vaccine and that maybe this is just about moving goalposts. I don't think it would change things much though, other than a little more understanding.
It feels pretty much like the usual biotech rollercoaster ride, it was all so simple back in Apr. Anyway for us longs, without COVID we'd be invested in a company with a slowing clinical program and dwindling cash, with it we look in better short term shape, be thankful for that at the least. From that perspective there's nothing much wrong with the decision to do this.
QM45 wrote: IMV is like a box of chocolates, you never know what ya gonna get...
Here is the "news" we have been so patiently waiting for over 5 months.
Anyone hanging their hopes on the "end of summer" bomb shell should be sorely disappointed, it being Phase 1 initiation or preclinical studies results.
If a tree falls in a forest and no one cares does it matter? I doubt it.
End of 2020 is just another goal post moved by this management team wrt Phase 1. Preclinal studies published timeline in peer reviewed journal from initial "coming weeks" in May to "end of 2020" is laughable.
It's hard to believe any of these so called "updates" by this stage. It seems anytime investor's frustration grows loud enough, they reluctantly throw a bone to the markets after promising pipe dreams for months. To say I have become sceptical of this team's propaganda would be an understatement.
It's great they got another 5M, better than nothing. That is the only concrete achievement. Everything else seems like a lot of BS justifying money grab by Ors and Co. from naive investors.
See you at the end of 2020 Ors, let's see if that turns into another box of chocolates...
I