I know he can't answer it, how ever, he plays with these idea's...

I know he can't answer it, how ever, he plays with these idea's daily using straw man arguments and defensibility arguments. 

Davisite's comments

"Yes I was surprised that BIT didn't measure the HIV DNA levels. My best guess is they were not expecting there to be any change in the HIV DNA levels. Of course when you are later claiming your drug is eliminating HIV from reservoir cells it is a bit of a problem to not have this data to prove it."

Davisite can only be "surprised", "guessing" and implicating BITs "expectations", "claims" whist raised a "problem" in the absences of  "data/proof"  in only 2 possible scenarios. He is asserting the statements of BIT are not aligned with the possibilities of the BIT-225 trail which in no uncertain terms equates to them being inaccurate and therefor are misleading at beast, or fraudulent at worse.

There can be only 3 possibilities in this context:

1. BIT is talking shit.  

2. Davisite is talking shit. 

3. BIT / Davisite are either both right or both talking shit. 

Take your pick. Happy Punting.