NanoViricides Inc (NNVC)

[Its_lose_not_loose]

If I may...

The fact that something has taken a long time does not by itself support a claim that the result will take another long time. In some cases, yes, I would definitely agree.

Back to my dumb car analogies: The race is 2000 miles. The car has been on the road for hours. Someone says, "We should see one cross the finish line soon." Someone else has said, "No you won't. They have been already been on the road for hours."

A slightly adjusted analogy: I've seen car #34 in 10 previous races. The driver and owner of the car have promised me 10 times in each of those races that they would at least place in third or better in the race. In each of those prior 10 races, the car has broken down and was unable to finish. I'm a little skeptical if the car can finish race #11.

That seems to me to be the logic you are using.

There are definite things that need to be done before a nanoviricide will be shown to work in humans. Those things are being done now, and in an orderly and professional way. It makes sense to predict that we are now much closer to the "finish line" than we were years ago. Unless it doesn't work.

Whether or not they poster to whom you have responded is right about his "six months" prediction, I can't say. But I do know that criticizing his prediction by saying a lot of time has already passed is not persuasive. Yet it is logical to me, and I'm not sure I would call it 'criticizing.' I asked how he knew it would be six months (so he must have some basis for that time prediction) and conditioned my question with past results (although I will give you the adage, "Past performance is not an indication of future results."