Hate to throw cold water on faithful investors, but it's time to step back and see the big picture.
Think what a silly notion it is that Lidak's placebo is "effective" and "active" against Herpes. The world has yet to come up with a significant treatment for oral Herpes, and lo and behold, Lidak mixes up a placebo with some vaseline and oil and "Wow, it cures herpes!"
It's much more likely that the reason that Lidak and placebo show the same time to healing is that Lidak is ineffective .
Lidak is trying to set up a smokescreen by comparing 4-5 days of healing within the trial to 8-10 days that "untreated" lesions take. But as others have pointed out all along, you can't compare apples with oranges. These 2 patient populations could be very different. The 8-10 days "untreated" lesions take to heal could include immunocompromised patients (with HIV, etc.), among other confounding variables. Lidak could have selected a much healthier population for their study, for instance.
If I were to bet, I would guess that in their study, Lidakol took 4-5 days to heal, placebo took roughly the same amount of time, and IF they had created a third arm of untreated lesions, this group would also show roughly 5 days to heal in this particular patient group. Perhaps Lidakol has some marginal benefits, but not blockbuster numbers.
Like I have posted before, I'm not a short seller. I bought several years ago at 4 dollars and 7 dollars based on the "pound the table" buy recommendations of BI Research. |
