"Ah, I didn’t know that."
And I'm pretty sure that you still don't. Maybe it's not important to you but here's what just happened. It started when someone asserted...
"That IPIX’s Brilicidin is being tested for its potential treatment of Covid 19 at major U.S. facilities by top scientists is like the high school kid down the street with a great arm being called up to the majors for a tryout."
You responded:
"I highly doubt that B was “requested”. More like Leo requested and offered it to be tested."
A third party then told you...
"I don't think so. The reason is he consulted with Drs Degrado ,Klein and some other researchers who did the original work with Polymedics. These researchers have become academic heavy weights. I don't believe they would have lent their names to the initial PR if they felt Brilacidin had no antiviral properties."
and
"The fact they were quoted gives Brilacidin some push among their academic peers who will be some of the decision makers who will arrange the initial coronavirus therapeutic trials."
Is it true that "he consulted with Drs Degrado ,Klein and some other researchers who did the original work with Polymedics" and "they were quoted"?
On Sunday the person who told you that said "I suspect Mr Ehrlich contacted Drs DeGrado, Tew,Scott, and Klein for input for yesterdays blog post."
Maybe I missed them but I don't see where those Doctors were quoted in any of the recent IPIX materials.
I know. Those things aren't important even if they aren't quite right. But they were used to refute your statement, a statement that seemed reasonable to me (definitely NOT what someone called "the stupidest comment and analogy of 2020"):
You said "I highly doubt that B was “requested”. More like Leo requested and offered it to be tested."
That made sense to me.
Market Data 
Markets 
