My view of the current human trial is that it is a
Post# of 72447
(Total Views: 535)
Posted On: 05/03/2021 8:30:47 AM
My view of the current human trial is that it is already known if B works quite well or not and the 29 day waiting period is not a factor in any way. Why?
The viral load should be destroyed in the first day to a high degree and the remaining load handled by the latter day dosings. Thus, the efficacy is shown positively in the first 6 days because Brilacidin is not treating the virus or preventing it from replicating, it is killing the virus. How can a virus return if it is totally destroyed? This is the main difference in Brilacidin being the only real virus killer in the gamut of drugs for CV19.
As for the 29 day waiting period, IMO that is strictly for safety issues. We know the virus isn't returning, we know Brilacidin has proven itself safe at the trial dosage levels being used via results from prior trials, so both the efficacy and the safety is darn well assured in the 29 day period.
This is where some top level decision making would have been nice for EUA authorization. By now they have what, say 70 patients or so already through dosing, and thus they should be able to determine if Brilacidin is working on patients on ventilators and a decision to allow it to be used on those in critical life-threatening situations due to CV19.
I know those in medicine will say that can't be done due to trial being blinded, but since we are talking pandemic and some major countries have their entire populations at risk, it seems to me some adjustments should be made to save lives. Nothing Rems... offers can KILL the virus, so if they see many patients drastically lowering their viral load after the first 10 days of trial they have to know it is the Brilacidin doing the work.
The viral load should be destroyed in the first day to a high degree and the remaining load handled by the latter day dosings. Thus, the efficacy is shown positively in the first 6 days because Brilacidin is not treating the virus or preventing it from replicating, it is killing the virus. How can a virus return if it is totally destroyed? This is the main difference in Brilacidin being the only real virus killer in the gamut of drugs for CV19.
As for the 29 day waiting period, IMO that is strictly for safety issues. We know the virus isn't returning, we know Brilacidin has proven itself safe at the trial dosage levels being used via results from prior trials, so both the efficacy and the safety is darn well assured in the 29 day period.
This is where some top level decision making would have been nice for EUA authorization. By now they have what, say 70 patients or so already through dosing, and thus they should be able to determine if Brilacidin is working on patients on ventilators and a decision to allow it to be used on those in critical life-threatening situations due to CV19.
I know those in medicine will say that can't be done due to trial being blinded, but since we are talking pandemic and some major countries have their entire populations at risk, it seems to me some adjustments should be made to save lives. Nothing Rems... offers can KILL the virus, so if they see many patients drastically lowering their viral load after the first 10 days of trial they have to know it is the Brilacidin doing the work.
(16)
(0)