RE:RE:RE:RE:News on the docketGood questions - I would expect all emperical data surrounding the 64 trial requirement would all have to be around the same/similar formulation. I can't seem to find a breakdow of this 64 number - how many subjects, control group, etc... etc... so I really don;t know. I only know that's its a heck of a lot more data than we have now. Perhaps we can patent this formulation/technique as well?
I think there are several companies doing trials, but their formulations likely differ significantly. I believe once ESEV is paid, this formula is proprietary to LIB (why else would we be forking over that kind of money for a medical study). But that being said, it seems as though they could just sell it now by partnering with another producer - remember - not many companies have a formula that is backed with an actual medical study at this point. The one thing that LIB has been able to prove here - the CBD dosage in most of the products currently available is unecessarily high. If we wait until 10 other comapnies have medical research to back up their formulations as well, we will once again be late to the party. We have an opportunity here being early.
IMO, they need to roll this formula out, NOW, and start selling a product. Think about this - if they can partner with an existing LP until they are licensed, we could in theory start producing dog treats containing this CBD formula very soon. This could be all the junk from another LP - water leaves, male plants (used for pollinating females and then they are garbage), etc... all contain CBD. I would think that a licensed LP has enough WASTE to get us going on establishing a production line for these treats. We might not even need a license for it as the THC concentrations are so low in these raw materials I don't think they need to be covered with a license at all.
Excited to see how this pans out.
LANk655 wrote:
if 64 trials are required, could there be some sort of "piggy back" deal wherein more iterations from another companies findings are combined to compile the 64 required? If so, are there that many different findings out there from another company that could be poised to take a partner/potential buy out by lib to obtain the remaining trials?