I'm not here to scare the horses, but I see this as...

I'm not here to scare the horses, but I see this as *potentially* bad news, not a poorly worded announcement (*don't know, just a hypothesis).  I look at the language used in the Ann (and I don't buy the 'they're just scientists' line - they're intelligent and know the extreme sensitivity around announcements):

"...Partial Clinical Hold letter based on non-clinical (animal) findings which currently limits the dose of PBT2 that can be given to patients..."

Most posters here think it's a simple lack of toxicity data at the new desired dose level or range.   If there was an absence of toxicity data at the higher level, why not say "an absence of data at the higher dose level?

I'm concerned about that word findings.  It tells my suspicious mind that there has not been an absence of toxicity, but a finding of some type of toxicity. "

I am a holder and positive sentiment, but much more concerned than I was 24hrs ago.

Can anyone help me with actual information, rather than the speculation we are all engaging in (myself included)?

bj