Ann: Change in substantial holding, page-25

Rubbish sarge. I’ve never led anyone to believe a preventative trial was done. No one has. All I read is those pro viraleze post in the context where anecdotal evidence and the real world testimony suggest it is a preventative. You know it is, I know it is. You and others keep banging on with the semantics for argument sake and to just be deliberately painfully. You’ve been banging on for ever saying they should have done a preventative trial years ago. I’ve been consistent and said numerous times that doing one would be very difficult ethically and have said the road they took was correct imo re progressing approvals in jurisdictions that were most likely to not have the issues we’ve seen here and in the uk particularly. All I’ve done with this post is confirm that. Typical of you to assume my views have been somehow aligned with anyone in particular and designed to conspire against you. lol. Don’t flatter yourself.