NanoViricides Inc. (NNVC)

[changes_iv]

Re-post at will...

BASi has never been the source of delays for viricide development. NNVC has.

Wrong. No business in the U.S. of America, none, operates in a vacuum. You must recall the company that was given US $140 million to do some research on Ebola. Must be nice, right? And no "QUID PRO QUO", of course. Years later, after all that research the drug was tested in Ebola infected patient(s)...

Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control...

Asked about TKM-Ebola, Frieden said it "can be quite difficult for patients to take" and "can actually make someone sicker."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/06/us-health-ebola-experimental-idUSKCN0HV1S020141006

What did NNVC got from the U.S. of America government or FDA? Yeah, go find the toxic dose on FluCide! The mandate was equivalent to find the toxic dose on PEG.

Abstract

PEG is used to improve pharmacokinetic properties of biologicals. Concern has been expressed about the toxicological effect and/or fate of the PEG. This paper reviews the available toxicity, metabolism and clearance data of PEG and PEGylated products in order to place such concerns in to appropriate context. The available data demonstrates that PEG itself only shows toxicity at high, parenteral doses and the usual target organ is the kidney as this is the route of excretion for unchanged PEG. A large therapeutic window (approximately 600-fold) exists between the maximum PEG burden from a current biological agent and the doses of PEG associated with human toxicity. Pathological changes which results in no functional deficit, PEG containing vacuoles in cells, have been observed with PEGylated biologicals. There is evidence that these PEG vesicle can resolve with time. In conclusion the doses used clinically for current and many future PEGylated biologicals are low and will result in exposures to PEG significantly lower than that required to elicit PEG toxicity. In all cases the routine regulatory toxicology studies would identify relevant pathology should it occur.

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-7643-8679-5_8

Recall what Dr. Seymour said,...

There are those who complain that the tox studies are delayed. I don’t believe that it is the case at all. Had our drug system not produced such amazing initial tox results, we would be well into the BASi studies at this time. The FDA mandates that we find the toxic dose. To do that requires an inordinate amount of material. When the amount of material needed is produced, the studies will start. I feel that it will be quite soon but I cannot, in good conscience, give a hard date. ~ Dr. E. Seymour, CEO of NanoViricides, Inc. --- Jul 20, 2014

Government's influence in business --- the bottom line,...

The Bottom Line

Governments may be the most terrifying figures in the financial world. With a single regulation, subsidy or switch of the printing press, they can send shockwaves around the world and destroy companies and whole industries. For this reason, Fisher, Price and many other famous investors considered legislative risk as a huge factor when evaluating stocks. A great investment can turn out to be not that great when the government it operates under is taken into consideration.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/11/how-governments-influence-markets.asp

==============================================

Everyone wants the items they buy to be safe to use or consume. Prof. Howard Baetjer of Towson University explains that when products undergo third-party certification processes to determine their safety, market forces are able to optimize the amount of testing conducted and consumers can use the information provided by certification firms to make their own decisions. It is difficult to say how much testing is enough: another test can always be run on a product, but at some point the benefit of the extra testing outweighs the costs. In a free-market system, competition among certification firms allows the market to work as it should and prevents both under- and over-testing of products. Conversely, when the government holds the monopoly on safety standards, products are likely to be over-tested, delaying their entry into the market and making them more expensive. Sometimes the costs of such delays cannot be quantified; lives can be lost while life-saving medicines are held up in safety-testing processes.