I don't understand the coldness of your response. I mostly have...

I don't understand the coldness of your response. I mostly have the same sentiment as what you've expressed:
- I don't think the results are significant enough to have a big share price movement. As I've said in the past, a big share price movement would only be triggered by a reading that states a partial or complete response and it did not show today. Probability of a CR and PR in the lowest dose cohort is low in probability.
- I agree that this is a high risk investment almost equivalent to punting and there are no sure fire bets, hence, the need for a good risk profile.
- I agree that we need that second cohort reading to have a better idea of the therapy being investigated

I expressed my thoughts regarding the cerebral edema from what I know and read in the academic journals and how I did not agree with the unwarranted attack on a poster that's posted quite credible information so far.

Additionally, I gave you an answer on your query regarding whether I would buy or sell or hold given the news.

I'm sorry if the last paragraph didn't make any sense, I was quite rushed in writing that post. But the point I was trying to get across was this is a high risk investment and probabilities of success are low. There are also lots of internal and external risks. But I'm confident that we can work the probability towards our favour, by finding the right information to analyse so we can be confident in our decision. So it becomes more informed than just unknowingly betting in a casino or in a horse race. If we're wrong, then we're wrong and hopefully we learn. If we get it right, then hopefully, it replicates.

I wanted to engage in a discussion. If you didn't agree or if something doesn't make any sense with anything that I said, feel free to correct, but don't let that disregard the other points that I made which were actually in agreement to your commentaries and queries.