Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[loanranger]

I know you're trying to help and that I'm a lost soul here....please don't quit.

I follow this, but I don't think it DIRECTLY answer my question....maybe I'm posing it badly so I'll try again:

"Not "inert" but happily (presumably) growing virus culture not hindered by any antiviral treatment (that why the expression "Think of it as B compared to a placebo"). Study culture start the same way. Then at some point of time treatment (Brilacidin) gets introduced into study culture. Some preset time period passes and virus counts per milliliter in these two cultures are compared.

Comparison against known antiviral (active comparator) is otherwise the same but control culture gets a dose of known antiviral at the same time as study group gets its treatment."

The second paragraph is informative but not relevant to the trial in question, unless they used an active comparitor and didn't mention it. That doesn't seem likely to me. How 'bout you?


So they took one growing virus culture and added B to it and another growing virus culture and added X to it (X=nothing or X=some secret stuff, again not likely).

At some point there there were "97 % less viruses in the treated culture". Here are the restated questions:
Without knowing what the comparitor was, how can we know how significant it is that after a while there are 97 % less viruses in the treated culture?
Wouldn't we expect that, after adjusting for die-offs or other common elements, the "unhindered" culture would not reduce the viral load at all and hence the reduction in the treated culture would be 100% versus the comparator?

I may have other ways to ask it....at some point hopefully I won't need to.