NanoViricides Inc. (NNVC)

[drkazmd65]

On this rare occasion - while the assertion is technically correct - It is also absolutely irrelevant.

There are no peer-reviewed publications (at leat of which I am aware) showing data that confirm the company's assertions that toxicity to animals is low or non-existant, or that effectiveness has been demonstrated for 'Cides in animals against any particular virus.

I believe you agree with that statement, although you may also regard it as irrelevant.

More specifically - and in this particular circumstance - I assert that the (technically correct) fact that there are no peer-reviewed publications showing these data being used against NNVC is beyond irrelevant. It is to be expected that most, if not all of the data have not been subjected to peer review as there is significant IP and 'trade secret' information that needs to be protected.

Fact also is - that even accepting the (I aruge false) premise that NNVC's insiders might have good reason to (potentially, IF they are unethical scammers) guild the lilly on the effectiveness of their 'Cides in animal models to keep their company afloat and enrich themselves,...... Outsiders like Dr. Harris have absolutly no reasonable reason to play along and sully their own reputations.

Fact is - the IND application will require all of this information to be disclosed prior to entering into Phase I trials. Specifically why we are still 'Pre-IND' here rather than 'IND'. We need to more detailed TOX data to cross that threshold. That's the only way to really quiet all the noise and misinformation that gets tossed about.