Yes we are on he same page there AD with our opinion on what...

Yes we are on he same page there AD with our opinion on what stable means and agree with all the points you made even down to the point with tough wife, mine is a retired Registered Nurse, generally when I speak of PAA I get a blank look, she was gobsmacked with that announcement almost disbelieving, very doubting Thomas like.
Also very uplifting to see Bella bouncing around the place pup like.

The point I am trying to make is our CSO at the time Dr Richard Mollard would have been heavily involved in the design of both the Lymphoma and the MND trials and the terminology and definitions/ glossary in both.

In the Lymphoma trial the definition for stable is " reduced by up to 30% but not increased by more than 20%."
What I am suggesting is our opinion on what stable in the MND trial equates to may be wrong. The question I am raising is are there tolerances when the the term stable is used in the MND trial? If so the definition of stable COULD be some improvement. This from a stock head release.

Pre-clinical studies have shown that monepantel can slow disease progression in MND models by clearing harmful materials in a motor neuron that stick together and make them unwell. The upcoming Phase 1 trial aims to advance monepantel as a potential therapeutic for MND

The question I am raising is if enough " harmful materials in the motor neuron" are cleared could there be an improvement in the disease that is not apparent with any other treatment.

Good luck to all especially the suffers of MND