It appears that when they run out of new stuff to
Post# of 72447
(Total Views: 302)
Posted On: 03/02/2019 3:29:15 PM
It appears that when they run out of new stuff to complain about, they recycle the old stuff that is absolutely absurd. How many times have we dealt with that "reverse split" garbage? The CEO has said on many occasions NO REVERSE SPLIT.
This is just as wrong-headed as the claim that Galera is somehow "ahead" of IPIX and that IPIX's Brilacidin-OM is "doomed" if Galera comes to market first.
How absurd.
As has been posted many times, Galera's drug requires visits to a clinic or hospital for IV infusion. This is expensive and inconvenient for a patient who is already sick from chemo or radiation.
IPIX's Brilacidin-OM is a convenient oral rinse, self-administered by the patient, so the only cost is for the drug itself -- not a couple hundred bucks per infusion for the cost of administering an IV, as Galera's drug requires.
And preliminary indications certainly are that Brilacidin-OM works better.
So, if you are a doctor, would you say "Oh my goodness, Galera's drug came to market first, so even if it doesn't work as well as Brilacidin, costs more to administer, and makes a sick patient come to the clinic -- I'll prescribe Galera's drug, because it was first to market"?
Of course not.
AND -- there's no guarantee that Galera's drug will even make it to market, much less be the first.
All this has been stated before. I hope that these false narratives will stop, as anyone posting them again proves that they are not credible.
I'm sure the bashers can come up with more false narratives. Please give us a little more variety in the lies we rebut.
This is just as wrong-headed as the claim that Galera is somehow "ahead" of IPIX and that IPIX's Brilacidin-OM is "doomed" if Galera comes to market first.
How absurd.
As has been posted many times, Galera's drug requires visits to a clinic or hospital for IV infusion. This is expensive and inconvenient for a patient who is already sick from chemo or radiation.
IPIX's Brilacidin-OM is a convenient oral rinse, self-administered by the patient, so the only cost is for the drug itself -- not a couple hundred bucks per infusion for the cost of administering an IV, as Galera's drug requires.
And preliminary indications certainly are that Brilacidin-OM works better.
So, if you are a doctor, would you say "Oh my goodness, Galera's drug came to market first, so even if it doesn't work as well as Brilacidin, costs more to administer, and makes a sick patient come to the clinic -- I'll prescribe Galera's drug, because it was first to market"?
Of course not.
AND -- there's no guarantee that Galera's drug will even make it to market, much less be the first.
All this has been stated before. I hope that these false narratives will stop, as anyone posting them again proves that they are not credible.
I'm sure the bashers can come up with more false narratives. Please give us a little more variety in the lies we rebut.
(4)
(0)