InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Rdunn88

09/15/21 9:37 AM

#374375 RE: sunspotter #374370

There were many others who had a higher reading than 426... Trial data will show how reliable that figure was...
icon url

williamssc

09/15/21 9:45 AM

#374378 RE: sunspotter #374370

Remdesivir has an SI of over 1000 and it's only so-so in the clinic.


Not according to Cell Research

Remdesivir SI 129.87
Cloroquine SI 88.5
Favipiravir SI 6.46
Penciclovir SI 4.17
Ribavirin SI 3.65

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41422-020-0282-0

We now know Brilacidin 426 SI

I do agree that Remdesiver is only so so in the clinic.

icon url

thefamilyman

09/15/21 10:37 AM

#374391 RE: sunspotter #374370

And once again, that questionable 1000 SI number for Remdesivir was determined by Gilead employees. Cell Research says that Remdesivir’s real SI number is 129.87. Perhaps that’s why Remdesivir’s performance in the clinic is only “so-so”. The 426 SI number for Brilacidin was determined by independent testing at a US Regional Biocontainment Laboratory. So, which SI numbers are more likely to be accurate?

Sunspotter said,

Remdesivir has an SI of over 1000 and it's only so-so in the clinic.