Graham, Graystone does bring up an interesting point about CYGS seemingly switching from technology to technology to see not what actually works, but what plays with investors.
Vectors are a hot topic right now. My expertise, if you can call it that, is not really on the single strand side (antisense), but on the double strand side (gene therapy). Antisense basically just stops something from happening (by introducing one of the two strands of DNA that, when it binds with the other, creates a harmless result and thus stops the replication of whatever it is you are trying to stop), whereas gene therapy actually creates DNA that fights the disease, which I consider a more proactive approach.
Nevertheless, a vector is merely some foreign substance like a virus that is able to get into a cell. Any decent researcher can create one. There are zillions of viruses out there from which to choose. Just change the virus and voila, you can apply for a new patent. One could make a living doing just that. The key is to find that needle in a haystack. The key is to know enough about viruses to also be able to also genetically alter it to further lessen the chances you infect the person with whatever disease the virus carries.
In order for CYGS to market their vector, they have to prove it has applications in humans. As we've discussed, this is a time-consuming and very costly process. Short of that, they'd have to convince someone to fund that research for them. This is not normally how these things are done. Biotech firms that create antisense molecules or genes have enough money problems just on their own technology. When they license a vector they want to know it already works.
CYGS has a tough road ahead. They have a horrible track record. Sorry, you can look forward, but credibility is important in the biotech world. Remember, we're talking academics here. They aren't going to be taken seriously until they have some published material in a major medical journal. I don't see this happening until they've done more testing on human cell lines that show their vector can, say, stop cancer cells from multiplying.
Jimbo posted an article recently about some researchers who after 12 years have just finally demonstrated how antisense works, let alone have come even close to perfecting a vector to carry it out. I just don't see how CYGS was able to leap right over that (revolutionary) part right into a "cure". In layman's terms, they've developed a carburetor before anyone has defined fuel. And the human body is much less forgiving than a car engine when inefficiencies are introduced.
From an investing point of view, anyone waiting for that "killer" press release that will rock the medical world is only fooling themselves. If we give CYGS the benefit of the doubt that they are truly on to something big, then be prepared to hang around for a few years. But, sorry to say, if CYGS perceive investors are not hanging around, you can be sure they'll be on to some other hot technology that will get them back (g).
- Jeff
|
