Ann: Phase I/II UTI/Urosepsis Rapid Infusion Trial Complete, page-61

I do not know enough about the history of the CEO and the board to make an informed comment on what they have said and what they have done. What is apparent to me is that the sepsis trials to date do make sense both time wise and methodology wise and I am eager to see the company to do well with its product realisation.

Just like anybody else, CEO's are not 'uniformly excellent' any more than their boards are. They may even make poor decisions. But that does not mean their products are crap (pixie juice) and necessarily doom their companies to fail and disappoint. Even idiots can strike a match and start a fire with dry kindling.

Not joining in a cynical knocking bandwagon however does not make me deluded nor a blind cheerleader. SH impatience is not a sufficient reason to doubt the quality of research or the planning of commercialisation. This is true even when the SH does not get the importance and limiting framework that trial regimes exist within. Impatience does not make for solutions. Having spent an entire lifetime in science in both labs and sales has taught me to ask the right questions about the right statements. I find it to be far better to speak to the personnel in question directly and ask for explanations. Just saying.