The lobbying excuse is tired, and is an “easy out” for saying that a Ceo had no clout or influence himself, or worse, was innefective in doing anything other than diluting and spending money. There are zillions of private grants that are happy to award based on independent merit of a thesis and evidence. Ipix has yet to update shareholders on the status of grants they may have or may not have applied to in the last 16 months of Covid. Brilacidin development. I am still wondering: 1) did ipix apply for any grants for Brilacidin Covid? 2) if yes, why haven’t they been granted any awards given advertised top 3% c19 candidate / 99% lab efficacy data? (Material information). Echoes of those old Kevetrin headlines. Terrifying for all to think that after all this hype on Brilacidin Covid, it’s very possible the company in the future fails to get a grant or a licensing deal of any worth, leaving the huge hype machine and then no follow thru wash cycle to repeat. That’s what should be keeping the CEO up at night. Shareholders too. You have seen this show before. Can it be fixed?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
