Due too all the ridiculous posting and threads this weekend,...

Due too all the ridiculous posting and threads this weekend, some older threads with relevant information have been pushed form page one of the discussion listings. As such, new readers, especially foreign investors who may drop in now that Biotron is gaining some international exposure, will be left to read only silly dribble. As such, please keep your posting relevant so as to keep the threads relevant.

While in critical mode, what about some constructive criticism of Biotron's hopes, or should I say, our hopes for Biotron.

My view is that due to the vast health landscape that coronaviruses occupy, there is going to be plenty of room for multiple players in the field.

Regarding antivirals, what would happen to Biotron's potential if one other, such as Remdesivir, was to prove successful in treating 2019cCoV?

We've already heard from a few posters that Remdesivir will make Biotron obsolete. This view is at best, very premature in the short history of nCoV, and at worse, completely wrong if Rem doesn't achieve positive results treating nCoV.

For those unfamiliar, Remdesivir is a broad spectrum antiviral made by Gilead, and has been sent to China for further testing. China is presently conducting controlled studies with it. However, initial testing in the USA have shown some beneficial results against many types of RNA viruses. Here is an extract from studies done in the US and note that the lead researcher, Timothy Sheahan, is also the same that I quoted yesterday in my post where he thought thought typical HIV antivirals will not be a final solution to nCoV. This does not necessarily include Remdesivir, as it is not solely for treating HIV. It is yet to be fully clinically tested on any.

'Remdesivir (RDV, GS-5734) is a broad-spectrum antiviral nucleotide prodrug with potent in vitro antiviral activity against a diverse panel of RNA viruses such as Ebola virus (EBOV), Marburg, MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), Nipah virus (NiV), and Hendra virus16,17,18. The mechanism of RDV’s anti-MERS-CoV activity is likely through premature termination of viral RNA transcription as shown in biochemical assays using recombinant EBOV, NiV, and RSV polymerases18,19,20. In primary human lung epithelial cell cultures, RDV is potently antiviral against circulating contemporary human CoVs, SARS-CoV (EC50 = 0.07 µM), MERS-CoV (EC50 = 0.07 µM), and related zoonotic bat CoVs17,21. We recently reported that therapeutic RDV improves disease outcomes and reduces viral loads in SARS-CoV-infected mice17. Since similar studies had not been performed with MERS-CoV, we generated a transgenic mouse with a humanized MERS-CoV receptor (dipeptidyl peptidase 4, hDPP4) and deleted for carboxylesterase 1c (Ces1c) to improve the pharmacokinetics of nucleotide prodrugs such that it better approximates the drug exposure profile in humans22. Here, we show that RDV provides superior antiviral activity against MERS-CoV in vitro and in vivo as compared with LPV/RTV-IFNb. In addition, RDV was the only therapeutic treatment to significantly reduce pulmonary pathology. Thus, we provide in vivo evidence of the potential for RDV to treat MERS-CoV infections.' https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13940-6

For the sake of curing the infected, let's hope that Remdesivir is successful. But would this make any success of Biotron's antivirals for nCoV irrelevant?

I don't believe so, at least not 'completely'. If Remdesivir could be proven in the immediate future to be very successful, and distributed accordingly to assist cure patients. It would be a great outcome for patients and would assist in slowing further spread of the virus by 'curing' carriers so that they cannot spread the infection further. But it would not be a cure for prevention of the virus spreading. No antiviral will be. Only a vaccine, much further down the track, will ultimately stop the spread of nCoV along with strong containment policy.

In the meantime, Biotron is continuing its work on testing its antivirals on nCoV. We should hear initial results in the near future. Maybe this week. As demonstrated in yesterday's post, expert researchers state that prepared antivirals testing against viruses can be achieved in days.

But how long will further tests take before approval or acceptance to treat the virus? One significant determination in that process will be the actual effectiveness of the initial tests and the evidence that Biotron can provide in safety. Much of this is already achieved.

But this post is to provide some thought regarding the consequences of a successful Remdesivir outcome against any success from Biotron.

It should be said that there is no guarantee that Remdesivir will be successful. Three outcomes to consider: It may be unsuccessful, partially successful, or very successful.

2019nCoV has different characteristics to previous forms of human coronaviruses, For instance, initial lower respiratory as opposed to upper respiratory; and its ability to cause infection in asymptomatic people. These features mean that at the molecular level there is plenty of difference that may require new drugs yet to be tested or developed.

In short, I hope that Remdesivir is successful, but I believe that Biotron's advanced research is equally viable and that the playing field will result in the need for numerous contestants.