Pierre, thanks for this. As I told already after headset's first...

Pierre, thanks for this. As I told already after headset's first posting and after sending the info to Prana (Kempler and Stamler) I was sure that Prana did not even know about the Bohlmann's paper, it was all news to Prana. What I understood was that Prana had given PBT2 to this group but it did not follow what was happening with it in the research..
PBT2 is still under patent but this patent does not cover PBT2 as an antibiotic ( IMO) but perhaps as a chemical compound. I think that UQ has filed a patent application for that purpose and that is why there should now be some discussions between UQ and Prana about the ownership in this new indication for PBT2. If these discussions go well there will perhaps be news published by Prana. Prana has lot to offer in this possible deal and I would think that some kind of positive result is possible ( if there are any negotiations). For a patent application they in UQ do not need Prana but for manufacturing, clinical usage etc they will need.