I certainly do think. Exactly that. But consider

I certainly do think. Exactly that. But consider-you note that Remdesivir is being given WITH Brilicidin and then Remdesivir is being given AS the "placebo". IF one ASSUMES that Remdesivir has NO (or even very low) effect on the patients, then what WOULD be causing ANY AND ALL effects? It seems one MIGHT THEN ASSUME that the candidate drug (insert your favorite IPIX property HERE) IS causing any (MOST? ALL?) oberved effects?

As I said, assumption is often incorrect. But the fact is there will be a certain level of placebo effect. Unavoidable and often a statistically predictable value. Since, in this current Brilicidin, the SOC comparator being used is Remdesivir, and since Brilicidin is being given with Remdesivir in the treatment arm, if Remdesivir is increasingly viewed as relatively ineffective, the what might a person ASSUME TO BE the cause of any positive results that are seen? It seems that, IF one assumes Remdesivir is having little to no effect, then there is only one other thing it could be.

This possible view that Remdesivir has even less effectiveness than some previoiusly may have thought is not particularly good for the "blinding" of the study. But it doesn't seem like it will invalidate anything related to the study results either. My speculation is whether any perceived view of a possible loss of "blinding" (again, some speculation "someone" might jump to) might spur someone to do something sooner than they might otherwise have done. I know this is verbous and long but I hope what I'm saying is clear. Maybe this will make it more clear. GOOOO BRILICIDIN!!!!