Sunclouds wrote: "Regarding sending letters to congresspersons of the press, Nader explicitly asked investors in a press release and in the conference call not to do that. Inflaming your reviewer is not an additional hurdle CYDY needs at this point. Would you publicly disparage your boss right before your review?"

Sun, I don't agree. I would tend to believe that Nader is very publicly toeing the line, and differentiating himself from the criticism of the FDA as a matter of public record. Suggesting we all talk nice to the FDA, meanwhile, would necessarily include the belief that they would be more likely to give CYDY an approval for any indication without public pressure. I don't think they are. They stalled CYDY for HIV and now they've stalled CYDY for Covid19 -- at the price of many thousands of lives! The letter was an attempt to respond to the public pressure. But the public pressure was all from Just Folks. If that pressure actually comes from some influential source, like the media or Congress, I think it will succeed.

Do you really think that if Sen. Sanders talks to the press, or a big-media outlet like (say) Sixty Minutes rakes the FDA over the coals, the agency would be more likely to give CYDY a bad deal? I think not. I think they'd stick their favoritist tails between their legs and scurry off to their untidy nests, squealing.

The FDA is not our "boss." If anything, we're their boss. They have a responsibility to the people to approve life-saving drugs, and they have not.