(Total Views: 791)
Posted On: 02/23/2022 8:32:24 AM
Post# of 148903
I think justdafactss made a good point on Ihub.
I know, I know...but hear me out.
jdf pointed out that the FDA sent out 11 warning letters yesterday and jdf"s point was that Cytodyn was not being singled out. But I actually think the opposite point is made. Cytodyn was very much singled out for unusual treatment.
If you look at the warning letters, and I went back through a lot of them, almost all are sketchy vaping and supplement companies with some unsanitary food producers sprinkled in.
Even the ones I looked at that got letters for the same thing we did, "New Drug/Labeling/Misbranded", are all supplement makers making unsupported claims for things like cat's claw and fulvic minerals. These aren't pharmas with rigorously scientifically evaluated drugs approved or in trials.
So, being in that dubious company may give a little insight into how the FDA views Cytodyn. I still think it probably started when Nader went on Dr Oz, a renowned quack, with Charlie Sheen years ago. Has the FDA's years of exasperation been warranted? I think Nader to a large extent brought it on himself, and on leronlimab and us, but everybody can have their own opinion. And it's definitely been cruel to prospective leronlimab patients one way or another.
Anyway, it's water under the bridge now but I thought it may be an interesting peek into how the FDA may see us and just another example of why austere professionalism going forward would be a damn good strategy.
Here's the list of warning letters:
https://www.fda.gov/inspections-compliance-en...ng-letters
I know, I know...but hear me out.
jdf pointed out that the FDA sent out 11 warning letters yesterday and jdf"s point was that Cytodyn was not being singled out. But I actually think the opposite point is made. Cytodyn was very much singled out for unusual treatment.
If you look at the warning letters, and I went back through a lot of them, almost all are sketchy vaping and supplement companies with some unsanitary food producers sprinkled in.
Even the ones I looked at that got letters for the same thing we did, "New Drug/Labeling/Misbranded", are all supplement makers making unsupported claims for things like cat's claw and fulvic minerals. These aren't pharmas with rigorously scientifically evaluated drugs approved or in trials.
So, being in that dubious company may give a little insight into how the FDA views Cytodyn. I still think it probably started when Nader went on Dr Oz, a renowned quack, with Charlie Sheen years ago. Has the FDA's years of exasperation been warranted? I think Nader to a large extent brought it on himself, and on leronlimab and us, but everybody can have their own opinion. And it's definitely been cruel to prospective leronlimab patients one way or another.
Anyway, it's water under the bridge now but I thought it may be an interesting peek into how the FDA may see us and just another example of why austere professionalism going forward would be a damn good strategy.
Here's the list of warning letters:
https://www.fda.gov/inspections-compliance-en...ng-letters
(5)
(2)Scroll down for more posts ▼
