Spoke briefly to my father who used to work for a large pharma...

Spoke briefly to my father who used to work for a large pharma and consumer goods company about the results.
His view was that if you could show a market opportunity for a benefit to 30-40% of affected people for this sort of a product then it would be an attractive proposition. Rule of thumb was that you would count 100% of the super positive people and 33% of the remaining non-negative group as a guide to a reasonable market sizing.
In this case, you would use 25% as your super positive group ('I would buy this product') and then add in one third of the 3 and 4 star group, which would be around one third of 59% (being 26% as 4 star and 33% as 3 star - these numbers from the 51% being 4 or 5 star and assuming that the 5 star people are the would buy it people).
That gives a total market opportunity of 25% plus a shade under 20% for a total of 44.7% or so.
Remembering that his company worked off 30% to 40% as being a strong market opportunity, the BG numbers appear to stack up well. Worth keeping in mind too that improved formulation will probably increase these numbers a bit further
We will all find out the truth of it in a few weeks time, but until I get news on the negative side I remain comfortable with my positive view on these results.