I have a much more negative view of this development. I have...

I have a much more negative view of this development. I have always been calling out for JF to conduct a clinical trial, but she thinks otherwise. But today I am going to discuss the in vitro data that SPL obtained.

The result from this table is misleading because the concentration tested in 10 mg/ml or 1% w/w astodrimer sodium, which is also the concentration of viraleze. However, we need to take into consideration only 2 x 0.125ml (10ml /80 puffs) of viraleze will be squirted into the nasal passage, which has a volume of 0.8-1mL (look up nasopharyngeal fluid volume). So at best, we have about 25% of 1% w/w astodrimer or a quarter the strength indicated by the table below.

Virus: SPL7013†Incubation Time	Percent Reduction of Infectious Virus vs Virus Control^
	US	Alpha	Beta	Gamma
30 seconds	>99.9%	>99.9%	>99%	>99%
1 minute	>99.9%	>99.9%	>99%	>99%
5 minutes	>99.9%	>99.99%	>99.9%	>99.9%
30 minutes	>99.99%	>99.99%	>99.99%	>99.99%

If we go back to the original paper by SPL, the drug does work even at 1mg/mL (1/10 concentration) but it is between 95% - 99%.

However, this is not my biggest concern. My biggest concern is the lack of clear clinical evidence that astodrimer will work as intended, while all other companies are conducting or in the midst of finalizing their clinical trials. We simply don't have evidence that astodrimer will prevent infection with Covid-19. I see no surprise that competitors who are conducting clinical trials will want Viraleze pull off the shelf. My concern will be how this will affect sales in Europe and India? I hope I am wrong and MHRA only wants a correction on the label, which would be a quick fix. GLTA