Ann: Preliminary Positive Results for the Treatment of SARS-CoV-2, page-229

I remain a strong supporter of PharmAust and Monepantel re cancer. Over a decade of research behind us and sound evidence to believe imo.

I'm much less convinced re Covid.PharmAust are typically impeccable and a marketer would say they are just selling the story, but to my mind there is a degree of cherry picking going on here.

As MPL can't be stopped from metabolising into MPLS, MPL's usefulness can never be viewed in isolation from its primary metabolite.

Looking closely, 2 of the 4 qPCR tests of MPLS at dilution factor 2, slightly enhanced the viruses ability to replicate. 2 reported a slight reduction, so overall close enough to neutral re replication. What I dislike is that unlike the dilution factor 1 results on MPLS infectivity, no equivalent TCID50 results of the infectivity at dilution factor 2 are disclosed. To my mind that is a glaring break from standard practice. I'm always wary when symmetrical data is not disclosed symmetrically.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that MPLS at dilution factor 2 actually increases virus infectivity. Ideally we don't want the MPLS metabolite to be aiding the virus at any concentration, but perhaps we can live with it if it only occurs to a limited extent within a limited concentration range. If I'm right it's an important dynamic that shouldn't be sidestepped, though it may be impossible to know how damaging or irrelevant it is until in vivo trials.

This has been annoying me for a whole day now. What do others think?