For the record, while you are correctly quoting my post, the first line was my quote of someone else's post. This is not my statement nor do I share the sentiment expressed in it:
”Each step that the vaccine mandates get squashed in the US is another step towards getting Brilacidin in the public’s eyes."
From the beginning, paraphrasing even given the risks (dinners almost ready):
Fast Albert made the statement quoted above.
I felt, and said, that the attention being paid to the success or failure of the vaccine programs was less important in terms of publicity to IPIX than a successful performance by Brilacidin would be and that that should be the focus.
Farrell responded to me, noting that some of the data in Britain suggested that the vaccines were showing less efficacy lately. He provided detailed support for the comments. He did not address my comments about the relative importance of B being effective versus any weakness in the vaccine programs.
Not sure what you're referencing but you then said to me
"Precisely why the current leader should be replaced."
Maybe so but I don't think that there's much of a chance of that. He's holding most of the cards and has the board for neighbors.
JH is a different issue and it's hard to tell where she stands. LE gave her the reins to deal with the Cummins lease issue back in the day so he doesn't look to her for science issues alone.
LE can continue to raise funds at discounted share prices so even if he tries to move on from B-CV and the pre-clinical work on other viruses, which I would expect him to do s l o w l y, he can extend the B-OM and B-UC sticks without much objection here.
I forget. Was there a question?
:o)
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
