**************************Again not to rain on anyone's parade...

**************************

Again not to rain on anyone's parade here but I think that all and sundry have missed the point here and that is that there is currently no clinical data to support the recent interest in BIT.  Secondly looking at the timeline for announcement of data in Q3 2018 I question what data will actually be released here by BIT and how a potential pharma partner would view the data that is going to be released later this year.

BIT appear to have shown that there were changes in "some" of the markersthey set out to measure in 27 study participants in Thailand, but not in othermarkers thought relevant from their previous laboratory-based studies. One ofthe measures that showed change was a macrophage activation marker sCD163. Tostate that the data "is consistent with targeting and eradication of virusfrom macrophage reservoir cells by BIT225", as BIT do, along withstatements about cure of HIV, is not fair and balanced.

Again I stand by the following, asthings stand today BIT have no evidence whatsoever that HIV has beeneradicated from macrophage cells in the trial participants. 

Establishingcure by eradication of HIV from reservoirs that are not reached by currentantiretroviral therapies is going to be very difficult and cannot be donewithout stopping treatment. Thenthere will be a wait to see if any of the participants get recurrence of theiractive HIV infection, a wait which will have to be several years at theleast. Duringthat period, if there is one recurrence, what would the conclusion be ? Then ifthere was another, what conclusion ? etc. etc..

Undertakinga trial of this kind is going to be difficult because the standard of carerequires continued lifelong antiretroviral treatment to try to avoid thedevelopment of drug resistance. Itis possible to withdraw therapy short term in a closely monitored clinicaltrial situation when cure is being assessed, such as with some HIV vaccines.However,treatment interruption is generally regarded as risky. BIT is a LONG LONG way from such trials, and while their small early stage study resultsmay indeed be promising, and they might even eventually succeed, the shareprice response suggests to me that the market is badly failing to understandthe risks of failure.

Itmay be that the investor market have been misled by implications in these releases thatBIT has evidence of cure - but this is simply not correct.

My final takeaway is that the clinicaldevelopment program will need to continue for perhaps 5 more years to get suchevidence.

I welcome the board and management of BIT to address the issues that I raise herein and I wonder how 'educated' investors may indeed react if BIT did come clean here - my questions here could be a reasonable basis for a clarification by the ASX  to BIT of recent ASX announcements.

Best of luck to everyone long here - caveat emptor indeed