A word about trials... Bear in mind that extraordinary results need extraordinary data. One small (pilot) trial may be enough to show a negative result of say 50% ineffective. Easy - it doesn't work any more than chance.
However, a positive trial to get major scientific and big pharma interest really needs to have a bare minimum statistical significance of probability of random occurrence of 1 in 20. (aka p<.05).
A small positive trial of around this value just means that a larger trial is needed to determine a positive or negative result with higher certainty (such as p<.001). But a much bigger trial takes more expense and time (and patience). Then other trials and independent verification may provide further support for the usefulness and safety of a drug, particularly to regulators such as the US FDA, Australian TGA and PBS.
In physics results you need to have p< 0.000001 significance, so biological trials have a much lower bar than proving Einstein wrong, for example.
Disgruntled and noisy shareholders in this forum have no part in probability outcome of a trial. Biotron's scientists and management has huge interest in a positive outcome and would love to get results out ASAP. Yes, they have an obligation to report to shareholders and the market, but there is a well accepted method behind clinical trials as the foundation of scientific proof in medicine before those results can be accepted and use to inform useful decisions.
BIT Price at posting:
9.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
