mbengineer, my understanding is that he is saying that the quitting at
23 thing is just his deduction/opinion and he checked with a
statistition to see if 23 COULD yield significant results. I don't like
the dude but I don't see a problem with his BS.
- - - - -
to YOUR logical conclusions????? concerning the company's using the
clinical results of 23 patients, instead of the original
"desired" 30, is rather strange IMO. But, for the sake of
argument, I suggest to you the following:
1) The company has had the results of the 23 patients for some time now.
2) Quite some time ago, Richard Guardino of Oxford was hired to perform the miracle of getting the above-mentioned results transposed into an IND application for submission to the FDA. Last I read $66,000 (or was it $80,000) was billed by him to the company.
TIME'S UP ----- WHERE'S THE PR STATING THE INDA HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE FDA.
Oh, I forgot, the new CEO can't make up her mind yet where the company is headed (is it Fast Track for Injectable; or topical HPV)....LOL
One other thing, you mentioned the company saved money by NOT GOING FORWARD WITH THE TESTING OF THE REMAINING 7 PATIENTS ----- I ask you this, HOW MUCH MONEY IS BEING WASTED BY THE CEO IN HER "ROAD SHOWS"????
out. More $:
Receives Second $3 Million Installment of Funding
Monday May 10, 7:31 am ET
YONKERS, N.Y., May 10 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Advanced Viral Research Corp. (OTC Bulletin Board: ADVR - News) announced today that it received the second of four $3 million payments from James Dicke II and his son James Dicke III.
As previously announced, on February 3, 2004 ADVR entered into an agreement with the Dickes whereby ADVR agreed to sell an aggregate of 120,000,000 shares of ADVR common stock and warrants to purchase 15,000,000 shares at $.20 per share, in four equal installments of 30,000,000 shares in exchange for the Dickes delivering an aggregate of $3 million to ADVR at each of the closings.
The first closing took place on February 5, 2004 and the second closing took place on May 5, 2004. Under the agreement, the third and fourth closings are scheduled to take place on August 4, 2004 and November 3, 2004 respectively.
Here's what they said when we got the first installment
"Advanced Viral shall use the proceeds from the funding to fund clinical trials of its drug AVR 118. ADVR has completed a Phase I clinical trial in the U.S. to evaluate the safety of the topical application of AVR118 in healthy
volunteers. There were no local adverse reactions to the application of AVR118 to the skin of these subjects. The recent funding will allow ADVR to plan a Phase II trial for the topical use of AVR118.
"I am pleased that with this funding, we can pursue our clinical trials in
both Israel and the United States," said Eli Wilner, Chairman of the Board of
in a later post he specifically says ADVR "QUIT at 23"
patients. (See post at end of this message)
Nowhere have I read anything about ADVR officially saying they discontinued the trial after 23 patients. Which is what mbengineer/Bill Bregman is saying here.
Nor can I substantially gather ANY statistical evaluation from the single press ADVR allowed about "encouraging" or "good" results. Nowhere can the phrase "statistically significant" be seen, and in order for ANYONE to state ANYTHING about the statistics of 23 patients vs 30 patients, they MUST see the pertinent underlying data - and not a resume of it.
mbengineer/Bill Bregman has obviously seen that data and is commenting on it publicly and THAT is a violation of insider rules.
I originally had no problem with seeing him here, but he has gone over the line, was warned before about doing just this exact thing. He has no control of his need to promote his drug and in doing so in the manner he has thus chosen, he has violated some very important rules. This is important stuff, and SOMEONE needs to put a sock in his public mouth!
09 May 2004, 09:24 PM EDT
Msg. 152011 of 152038
(This msg. is a reply to 152008 by nvphyl.)
Jump to msg. #
MB new nothing that wasn't public. I just took the time to understand. The gov. allowed 30 to be tested. For reasons, the Co. quit at 23. What could be the reasons.
(a) They were unsuccessful.. Not logical since a the first fifteen showed good results.
(b) Saved $ since 23 gave results that were statistically significant.. The additional 7 would not have changed the statistics much.
(c) The added 7 would have increased costs without helping the proposed??ind at the FDA.
I am sure more reasons could be brought out on this board.
By the way, i checked with a statistician for my answers.
Even in the disclaimer he seems to reiterate his knowledge.
"...For reasons, the Co. quit at 23..."
I believe the management needs to address this. If he knows what it appears he knows, who leaked the information? Wilner? Hawkins? Someone else? Cover-ups don't work very good.
I still think they are going to wait for Trial completion (30 patients) before they report results. They have never publicly indicated otherwise.
Dicke's are buying at .10 PPS- NOT .20.....
The PR reads.....
"As previously announced, on February 3, 2004 ADVR entered into an agreement with the Dickes whereby ADVR agreed to sell an aggregate of 120,000,000 shares of ADVR common stock and warrants to purchase 15,000,000 shares at $.20 per share, in four equal installments of 30,000,000 shares in exchange for the Dickes delivering an aggregate of $3 million to ADVR at each of the closings."
IMO- The PR is purposefully misleading, in the hopes that some dolt will read it just the way you did, and buy in under the belief that he is getting in at a discount to the "BIG" investors......
Pretty Funny & Desperate Stuff~......IMO- The new CEO is cut from the same cloth as the old CEO & the former interim CEO......
ALL I get , got, recieve, NO INSIDE INFORMATION. These conclusions are
reached by taking public information from this board,, the web page and
releases and putting them together without prejudicing my conclusions. I
note some of my conclulsions are taken out of context and twisted. If u
disagree with what I say, that is what this board is for, but don't put
words into my mouth. I was told 15 out of 23 was considered a good
sample. If u think ddifferently, say so put ur thoughts with reasons on
- - - - -
believe you mb- I think you've been out of the "privy" loop
since December 2002.....
great also. Still have all my shares and have lost touch will everything
surrounding ADVR. Sitting in Ft. Lauderdale (again) and will stay here
through hurricane season. Insurance is killing me. Other then that, life
Glad to here you got out with your shirt still on and recovered some of your losses. Most here are still way down and will remain so for another year or more and may never recover. I am stubborn so, I will remain till the bitter/sweet end.
When I left (16 months ago) the pps was lower and we had just completed phase 1 of the HPV trials. Here we are now still dinking around with phase 1. Too many directions being taken at the same time and being switched too often. Then again, this is a "switch type modulator". Guess we should have gleaned more meaning from that statement.
the 10K concerning Israeli trials.....
"We are focusing our clinical efforts on our one ongoing PhaseI/II open-label, dose escalation clinical trial being conducted at The Kaplan Medical Center in Rehovot, Israel of AVR118 for cachectic patients with AIDS. Out of 30
total patients contemplated under the protocol for this study, 23 patients are enrolled, 22 of whom have completed the full course of treatment of AVR118, and one is continuing to receive treatments of AVR118, as required under the study. Results from the first 15 patients showed improvement in appetite, weight gain or stability, and enhanced quality of life. None of the patients reported any serious side effects associated with AVR118 therapy. We estimate completion of this study during the second quarter of 2004. It is uncertain at this time when cash inflows will result from this study. The completion of the study is dependent upon the availability of patients meeting the prescribed protocol and the ability of the hospitals to meet the requirements of the protocol."
Assuming this info was accurate as the filing date the above disclosure could very well be interpreted as an "indication" of what mb is now saying......Perhaps the 10Q due by Friday will shed more light.....
More to be revealed......-kevtod
told you that "15 out of 23 was considered a good sample"
without knowing the specific details of the data in the sample(s)??
WHO told you that ADVR was going to "quit at 23" patients, instead of continuing to try to find the announced 30 they have publicly revealed.
What you don't understand is that it is up to YOU to detail YOUR information source, not for us to try to find it out.
That you, Bill Bregman, chooses to post here only can have the PERCEPTION of insider information being revealed.
Ok, then you say,
"NO INSIDE INFORMATION. These conclusions are reached by taking public information from this board,, the web page and releases and putting them together without prejudicing my conclusions. I note some of my conclulsions are taken out of context and twisted"
PLEASE, Bill, report here what information - specifically - are you referring to that allows you to extrapolate that the testing done on the 23 patients are statistically significant; what Web page data are you referring to, what release(s) tell you that the company is going to "quit at 23" patients - instead of going to 30; put the conclusions into"context" and un"twist" them (for us) so that we might understand how you arrived at your conclusions, which are (your words)::
** the company's testing is only going to do 23 patients then quit and...
** the data from 23 patients will be sufficiently statistically significant - as 30 might be - without knowing the underlying data (which I assume is a well guarded secret)!!
The ball is in your court to document your statements.
"They have never publicly indicated otherwise."....
I think they have "indicated" that in the 10K last month.....
I have no idea if he was given information or not. No one is twisting what he has written. All one has to do is read. I read his words as statements not opinions. All I am saying is that if the Company reports on the results using just 23 patients it will indeed look like mb was treated diferent than others. I hope he wasn't! IMO The company should clear the air now.
From the 10K
"...We estimate completion of this study during the second quarter of 2004..."
I don't see how the 10K indicated the trial was not going to include the total of 30 patients. There is no qualifier stating they "intend" to stop the Trial with less than the called for number of patients. They say "...We estimate completion of this study during the second quarter of 2004..." I suppose we could get Clitonesque and question the meaning of the word "completion". Barring that, I have to expect the results to include the enrollment mentioned in the protocol.
my only point is that Bregman should NOT be posting here about ANYTHING
that has to do with what ADVR is doing.
It's another issue to interact with posters here, but when a former founder/BOD who continues to own tens of millions of shares, and still has connections with the company along with a relationship with a current BOD who was named at HIS request - it only can bear negatively on him and the company no matter where or how he gets his information.
He knows that, we know that, and the company knows that. Why he insists on showing up here is your guess only - and that he continues to do shows his complete disregard for whatever success the company might have and undermines it - as well as flirting with SEC rules.
And I'd bet you heavily he continues to garner inside information to a great extent.
point Bernie- My point is this and only this.....
mbengineer has been posting here for a couple of years now. Not once has he given this board anything other than a little kernel of truth surrounded by fluff.....If he does upset the apple cart, it is himself that has the most to lose......
So far, all I see is "No Harm, No Foul"......
PS- (Do you really think Van Sant is that stupid ???)
member of the BoD chosen by friedland and myself was a prosecutor for
the SEC. Since we had a very large investment in the co, we wanted to
make sure the co was following the straight and narrow.. This bod member
knows SEC law better than u do. I am happy to say i beleve the Co. is
following all the rules of the SEC and is probably going foward as I
- - - - -
am happy to say i beleve the Co. is following all the rules of the SEC
and is probably going foward as I hoped."
We're not talking about "the Co." here, Bill - we're talking about YOU!
Have you ever been advised by the company or any lawyers about whether you should be posting on a public board??
If so, what did they tell you??