RespireRx Pharmaceuticals Inc (fka RSPI)

[haysaw]

<<3) I don't understand your point on the FDA. They gave permission to do a single-use study to assess PET activity impact. There was no OK for longterm utilization, which you would need for an AD drug. Getting the OK for a one-shot trial has very little to do with being allowed longterm use--BP knows that, and would have little stomach for making an uphill climb even steeper.>>

(Smiling)-I don't understand what you don't understand. The FDA allowed Cor to continue the AD study with CX-717, period. Why would they allow them to continue advancing it in AD, if it was automically doomed for longer term use? That would defeat the entire purpose, would it not? That makes zero sense to me, but perhaps you can provide a black and white answer.

I still don't understand how #1 is insurmountable--by any stretch of the imagination. Prestige? Income?--Are these the hightest priorities for university researchers? If so, they are in the wrong sector of their industry. Access to AD sufferers? How rare are Pet scanners? Are these unpaid volunteers (researchers and subjects)? Are the researchers providing their facilities and equipment for free?

Maybe I'm just too hard-headed, but I don't see these challenges as any more difficult than for other companies undertaking other studies. Btw-I live in South Florida. I know and see many, many cognitively impaired elderly who do not take AD medications, and have never been involved in any AD study.