this is the same Buckland who in the last couple of weeks was saying that the completely independent Principal Investigator in charge of the MND trial requesting that the analysis - always held at the end, be brought forward (hence the expression"interim" analysis) was somehow bad news? No, a person who could suggest that unambigiously good news is bad news is NOT A PERSON TO BE TRUSTED. IF HE KNOWS SO MUCH ALREADY, THEN HE CAN GET OFF HIS BACKSIDE AND PROVIDE CONTEXT WITH LINKS AND ALL. He is constantly engaging in what I consider disingenous behabiour since the first human trial.
