@rushnlabs Hey, how do we make this simple enough for you to stop avoiding it? Fully-funded means we don't NEED to raise. If for that statement to be true, they have to prioritize their main assets and put another on hold, so be it. Again, that's the reality of biotech startup even in a good economic setting.
The fact that they did in fact raise does not invalidate the statement they made that they did not NEED to. You can disagree with the reasons why they accepted the institutional offer: that's your right. But that's not what is going on here: you're stumbling on the mere semantics of the matter. It is really concerning if you are in good faith. I don't know how you can function if you truly don't understand this.
This has been hashed and rehashed for months: I'm surprised you're still stuck on this.
Am I telling you to be glad that they can't miraculously run three large scale clinical trials at once? Of course not. I don't care how you feel about it. You can sulk and be as upset as you like. What I'm saying is your disappointment stems from silly expectations. Companies at the stage IHL finds itself are frankly just glad to be funded at all, in this climate, let alone afford to put their two most promising candidates through clinical trials under FDA IND.
You don't have to excuse Incannex for not making all your dreams come true, but I get to point out how your dreams aren't realistic, and maybe, just maybe, you're missing the forest for the trees. IHL-675a and IHL-42x are enviable assets to be hitting the milestones they are hitting. If you want to sulk about a third asset being momentarily put on hold, you do you.
