$RLFTF (related) from flystuffz on Yh-0 Remdesi
Post# of 653
(Total Views: 362)
Posted On: 05/05/2021 1:07:32 PM
$RLFTF (related) from flystuffz on Yh-0
Remdesivir received and still maintains full FDA approval while being recommended against by the WHO who conducted their own more extensive trial. Meanwhile Aviptadil is still struggling to receive an EUA while the FDA has no other therapeutics besides Remdesivir to treat Covid. Further there's now a trial testing exclusively Aviptadil and Remdesivir together as promising drugs for efficacy yet one of them is fully FDA approved while the other still is only available under EAP.
Are FDA waiting for results from the NIH trial to make a determination because it all kind of stinks if that's the case. Possibly the NeuroRx $BRPA data could have been misrepresented?, but everything we've been told says that Aviptadil is definitely safe and could be effective. It could be that the second EUA application still hasn't been submitted or only has been submitted recently which in that case management has grossly misrepresented the timetable for submission.
Drug approval of rlf-100/aviptadil/zyesami is literally THE most important catalyst. IP disputes, profit disagreements, delays, unprofessional communication, drug naming, whatever else pales in contrast to if and when approval will come. What is the status of the EUA submission? That is the absolutely most important question and none of us know the answer to unfortunately.
Remdesivir received and still maintains full FDA approval while being recommended against by the WHO who conducted their own more extensive trial. Meanwhile Aviptadil is still struggling to receive an EUA while the FDA has no other therapeutics besides Remdesivir to treat Covid. Further there's now a trial testing exclusively Aviptadil and Remdesivir together as promising drugs for efficacy yet one of them is fully FDA approved while the other still is only available under EAP.
Are FDA waiting for results from the NIH trial to make a determination because it all kind of stinks if that's the case. Possibly the NeuroRx $BRPA data could have been misrepresented?, but everything we've been told says that Aviptadil is definitely safe and could be effective. It could be that the second EUA application still hasn't been submitted or only has been submitted recently which in that case management has grossly misrepresented the timetable for submission.
Drug approval of rlf-100/aviptadil/zyesami is literally THE most important catalyst. IP disputes, profit disagreements, delays, unprofessional communication, drug naming, whatever else pales in contrast to if and when approval will come. What is the status of the EUA submission? That is the absolutely most important question and none of us know the answer to unfortunately.
(0)
(0)Mondobiotech Holding AG Basel (RLFTF) Stock Research Links
$MJ