RE:RE:RE:Big Pharma Question for The Resident Expertsenriquesuave wrote: There is no pill produced by big Pharma which treats cancer effectively. Immunotherapy is IV with lots of side effects. A One and Done treatment that is simple and uses pretty much the same standard equipment urologists use should be an easy sell. Plus we have RUtherin
frebeach1 wrote: Why would big pharma be interested in a complicated proceedure vs a pill they can easily manufacture and distri ute.
Dave at Bare Oaks
plantrader wrote: Is it generally true that big pharma tends to prefer to let the smaller companies struggle on their own until such time drug/treatment approval is achieved, before making a buyout offer, as a way to de-risk their investment? This obviously could mean waiting longer & it definitely means they'd pay a lot more. For more of a sure thing versus spending much less (much sooner) on something that's riskier & might not pan out.
Is that generally true? Or is it generally the opposite, they'd prefer to pay less and assume more risk to obtain a less mature solution sooner. Shotgun approach. Or is it impossible to answer that question because it depends on context and no such generalities to be drawn?
I thought some of you who've been into that pharma industry for many years might have insight on this.
And didn't TLT design the TLC-3000 with radiology techs in mind? So they could get into it quickly? Yes, someday there will be a shot or pill or sublingual lozeng. Until then I think TLT should have SoC for several Cancer indications. Just need to finish that GLP work.
Aren't they also lining up the possibility of using this tech for not just Covid and sheathed Virii, but also bacterium as a new type of Anti-Biotic?? Seems to me they are signaling that sort of move IF the Covid angle works out...