Iwould like to thank everybody for the response. PRCT does not seem to have mentioned any safety and/or efficacy in preclinical animal studies. Why??? I always thought that was a requirement before comencement of human trials.
FYI:
"Federal Study of Lubricant Blasted" Washington Times (07/25/96) P. A3; Price, Joyce
Despite criticism from conservative groups, a federally funded study is being launched that will determine if nonoxynol-9, a widely used sexual lubricant, is safe for anal sex among homosexuals or whether it could increase the risk of HIV transmission.
The $300,000 study, under attack because it is limited to homosexual men engaged in a sexual practice that is illegal in many states, is being funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. AIDS activists are applauding the study,
however, saying it is important because anal sex is still the leading mode of HIV transmission. During the 1980s, nonoxynol-9 was found to cause vaginal ulceration, thus increasing the risk of HIV transmission, in a study of Kenyan women. Because rectal tissue is thinner, the problem could be worse for passive participants in anal sex, according to Zeda Rosenberg of NIAID.
The new study will evaluate the rectal use of the chemical in 35 homosexual couples.
This is from the Vancouver Conference (1996).
IMO, safety of PRO-2000 will be more important than efficacy. Before investing a lot of money, I would wait until PRCT at least discloses some Phase I data. (Although, I should admit, there is little downside in the stock now - just $5/8).
T. |
