Ann: Positive Preliminary Results from SMARTCOUGH-C-2 Study, page-228

In the beginning it seemed like a miracle tech with around 90% accuracy. And people said that because it's a learning algorithm, it will only get better. That piqued my original interest. But the story gradually changed and the reality seems to be that it is stuck around the 70% level at best. The original 90% accuracy stuff wasn’t proper scientific validation. But look how the stories have changed:

ORIGINAL STORY: 90% accurate is great, and it will only get better with machine learning.

NEW STORY: 70% is great, and it will only get better with machine learning.

REALITY: It didn’t get better over time. It got worse overtime.

ORIGINAL STORY: RAP obtained the greatest doctors in the world for this study so that no one can doubt the results.

NEW STORY: The results are bad because the doctors made mistakes or are shonky.

REALITY: The point of the study was to prove the product worked. If the results are bad, then surely it's dubious to blame the doctors or the study, especially as it was a second attempt. Even if they were to blame, then why did management choose this route?

IME, it's best to drop the excuses and hopes. Stories change for the worse with most penny stocks. As soon as the story starts to change, I drop it, which I did in this case. Rarely does it turn back around. Not advice. Just my experience.