Agreed. I just don't see any remaining value in the trial...

Agreed. I just don't see any remaining value in the trial though. Even when it is eventually reported, I can't imagine any positive impact from it.
It's a "safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetic study" on 40 people and there is a placebo group. So that might mean 20 people in each cohort and we've already been told "extremely well tolerated by all...".

So if we are "lucky" we get:
"We are pleased to announce the trial had no safety side-effects (*which we kind of already knew... see UK sales)"

Or if we are unlucky we get a minor side effect reported by a small number of people e.g.:

"A participant in the cohort with the active ingredient reported an itchy left testicle after 10 days of use, but due to the size of the study we weren't able to prove significance of this either way. No patients in the placebo cohort reported an itchy testicle (either left or right). A further follow up study with a larger patient in-take is recommended".

I think @chrisnj is on the right track. Any human trial that doesn't include efficacy is of little interest to anyone.
IMO, a tiny safety trial like this became meaningless once Lloyds started selling Viraleze to thousands of users.

I guess once the trial has started it looks pretty bad to pull the plug and stop it and so it's better just to spend the money and complete it.