"But the fact which you are unable to dispute with evidence of...

"But the fact which you are unable to dispute with evidence of any sort is that firstly MSB Covid treatment is not economically viable and secondly, in any event by the time MSB get anything approved there will be a plethora of better cheaper alternatives even if any sort of trial shows it is effective."

By gum you have a great gift of imagination to be polite. To imagine something is so just because you think it is, only because there is no data yet.

All we know is that by the time the last readout happened the field of engagement had changed so much it was not possible that remestemcel-L could reach a better than 43% survival over the existing standard of care by the final readout. Until the remaining data is released at the end of the trial it is not possible to know anything else.

In answer to your bizarre assertion regarding economic viability as a solution for ARDS the number crunchers at Novartis clearly had some kind of notion that it clearly was potentially economically viable in global markets. If you have questions on that maybe you should direct them to Novartis in the first instance.


https://www.novartis.com/our-company/contact-us

Per the information from ardsglobal.org currently the death rate from ARDS outside of COVID19 is about 40% across the more than 60 different causes of ARDS, where are the plethora of cheap treatments for the 40%? The numbers are considerable, the demand is great, still.

Your view that "there will be a plethora of better cheaper alternatives even if any sort of trial shows it is effective" is an assumption at best.