The risk that I see is NOT safety, because we alre
Post# of 72447
Posted On: 02/19/2016 1:54:23 PM
The risk that I see is NOT safety, because we already know it's safe in humans. We just don't know if it works or not in humans.
But it is certainly not a binary event, like the MDVN disaster a few years ago when their stock was cut in half, and then half again, in a matter of seconds and then minutes, because of failure of their drug. (It's since come back up). Why isn't it binary? Because Prurisol is only one of FOUR clinical trials. The company doesn't fail as a company in the (in my opinion unlikely) event that Prurisol is utterly ineffective.
It's possible a higher dose is needed relative to the mice, for efficacy. Or it's possible that the dose can be lower. Or it's possible that it doesn't work at any dose.
Has it occurred to anyone else that if this form works on psoriasis, not only might it work on other auto-immune disorders, but maybe it would have fewer side effects for the AIDS patients who are the users of this drug in its original FDA-approved form?
But it is certainly not a binary event, like the MDVN disaster a few years ago when their stock was cut in half, and then half again, in a matter of seconds and then minutes, because of failure of their drug. (It's since come back up). Why isn't it binary? Because Prurisol is only one of FOUR clinical trials. The company doesn't fail as a company in the (in my opinion unlikely) event that Prurisol is utterly ineffective.
It's possible a higher dose is needed relative to the mice, for efficacy. Or it's possible that the dose can be lower. Or it's possible that it doesn't work at any dose.
Has it occurred to anyone else that if this form works on psoriasis, not only might it work on other auto-immune disorders, but maybe it would have fewer side effects for the AIDS patients who are the users of this drug in its original FDA-approved form?
(3)
(0)