Toinv

Thanks for your post. I have had many of the same observations.

1. The study of epigenetics is not mainstream as the epigenome was not discovered until some time after the genome (around the 2001 for the genome if memory serves me correct). Your observation on CRISPR is correct as there are a number of ethical issues surrounding that technology. Anything that could involve ethical issues like making the perfect human being as was talked about some 70 to 80 years ago certainly gets some press, good or bad. The challenge for the developers of epigenetic drugs like ours will be to educate the public enough so that they understand the difference between what we are doing and gene splicing. The press in general does not know the difference as this is not yet "mainstream".

2. DM talked about the lack of clinical successes in the small molecule area in AGMs from years gone by. It is a hurdle that we and other epigenetic developers will have to clear as successes are made in our trials. These terms will have to be clarified by the mainstream press that currently does not seem to understand what we are really doing. The IR departments of all of the company's in this arena have a lot of public education to do. No different than the computer industry 30 to 40 years ago with terms like email, bits, bites, text messaging, RAM, micron technology, internet etc.

3. We are definitely seeing more in the press about epigenetics with regard to cancer and pan bet inhibitors  than anything else. In one of Zeniths presentations they show that ZEN3694 has been tested in animal models with about 30 existing cancer drugs that showed positive results. Why hasn't that been crowed about by our Canadian press? or any press for that matter? From what I understand of the broker presentation back in Feburary where Dr K spoke, the presentation was so good that virtually everyone(non scientific people) there understood what she was saying. The whole drug industry needs to have presentations like that made available to the masses so that epigenetics can become more "mainstream". Again that takes us back to the IR departments of all of the drug developers.

4. and 5. There is promise in many areas that can only be followed up on when money is available. What ever company that ends up with our technology will have it seems, an endless mine of targets to follow up on. Again if memory serves me correctly there are some 86 different diseases that RVX/Zenith have identified that their technology could have a positive affect on. It's only money that's holding us back.

6. I agree. I have heard that the presentation(s) that were made last August at the sponsored lunch event that RVX did in Spain was the talk of the the conference but saw nothing. Little video clips or info bites from attendees could go a long way to building more credibility for the company.

7. No comment

8. I totally agree with you on the FDA approval to have BETonMACE testing done in the USA and the leverage that seems to have been completely missed. For goodness sake that was certainly something to crow about why the heck wasn't it used to spin a positive story? If we get a positive result in this BETonMACE trial having this FDA approval virtually doubles the value of the company.

No apologies for rambling required. I like the points that you bring forward. Keep it up. Who knows maybe someone within the company will see your ideas and start to impliment some of them to help them spin a positive tail for this little gem.

tada