Oh wow, it's one of the Bobs of AKP fame! How funny -- you are a cheerleader for the two dodgiest companies on the ASX! What are the chances?! Love it.
Anyway, to answer your question, you are a bit confused in steps 1-4. But correct enough that I can't be bothered correcting you.
However:
"5. The results of this are generally very effective"
No -- the fact we hear nothing at all about blood any more means that bit probably didn't work, and they are trying to rewrite history by trying to pretend this was a "urosepsis" trial all along.
They are also not saying what pathogens they tested and what the results are, only mentioning e. coli in the last release.
And ex vivo testing like this is like killing cancer in a mouse or test tube; it's very easy to do. But in a human, you'll find the bacteria can probably evade the Recce magic pixie juice by hiding in the bladder wall.
To answer your offensively pollyannish final paragraph, this sort of trial is not, per se, a bad thing. But RCE continually misrepresent and conceal the nature and purpose and results and endpoints of this trial. Also, this has taken EIGHT YEARS to get to this point. Why eight years to conduct simple pharmacokinetics like this?
RCE Price at posting:
60.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)