“…BIT225 showed no antiviral activity…”, page-23

Sorry Moosey,I'll jump in her if that's OK?

The information contained in this paper is irrelevant and misleading to the effectiveness of BIT225, and should not have been published, let alone posted or referred by others!

I also looked at the paper earlier but decided not to post it for the following reason -

it is based on obsolete information regarding BIT225.

In doing the research I looked up the patent details that they used to synthesize the BIT225 compound, See below:-

"BIT225 was synthesised via 5-bromo-2-naphthoic acid and 5-(1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-2-naphthoic acid according to the patent detail (US20150023921A1); analytical data was consistent with the expected structure."

Patent No US20150023921A1
Hepatitis c antiviral compositions and methods

This WAS a Biotron patent originally filed in 2008 and WAS ABANDONED BY BIOTRON IN 2015!

If this patent was abandoned by Biotron, this suggests it didn't work, and has thus been superseded by a new patent application, with different BIT225 structure that does work - hence - ANY MENTION OF BIT225 IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT, and the reality is that this paper, should have been rejected as FALSE for using an obsolete (and obviously unsuccessful) compound configuration OF BIT225 for its investigation!

DYOR!