BackgroundFirstly I'm not sure it's appropriate to engage in a...

Background
Firstly I'm not sure it's appropriate to engage in a competition for the higher moral ground on the basis of comparative suffering in the hands of the medical system.

I may or may not have something - or even a lot - to say about that.

Is there a competition on? I decline to join it. The topic is trading halt not let's talk about who is more hardly done by.

Yes, suffering makes it so much harder to remain objective particularly when paper losses add to them, but the onus is on everyone to try to be the best possible version of themselves, including on-line. I'm not perfect and in the face of adversity engage in black humour.

But. It's not what happens to you as much as who you become in response. Nastiness is like swallowing poison and expecting the other person to die.

The biting and cynical remarks you make (for instance, about suffering children or Silviu Itescu's wealth) have a context now.

But I still don't think they're justifiable in either case.

I have greater understanding but you don't make yourself any a better human being with that approach IMO.
As far as possible, I remain focused on the need to remain calm in the face of adversity.
Clearly you have found other means to get by.
If you aren't a shorter you certainly play into their hands masterfully and do their work for them with astonishing intensity and volume.
The result is the same. Lack of fairness and engagement.

I do try to hold manipulators to account and I cannot stand liars or those who use HC to assist their trades. For this reason I've been very tough on a crowd in another stock, the thought that I may buy back in horrifies them. But money is money. If I do it I won't not care much about their groupthink or mob mentality. The nastiness involved has been breathtaking.

Onto substance:
Yes the US patent office does consider novelty as an essential element to patent approval. But it also exercises some scientific rigour in analysis of the application, novelty is essential but it's not the only necessary hurdle.

You try to force me into a corner of saying that the FDA's approval is not as important. In which respect? I was slamming dunno's comment because like you, she gives no quarter. She hardly paused for breath to find another possible negative to pile in with.

I didn't say that FDA approval wasn't important, indeed I've been banging on about the FDA's need to approve for a considerable time, but this is an absolute masterstroke by SI and his colleague, I'm sad that you cannot find it in your heart to enjoy it.

Similarly, it's remarkable that you let the FDA off the hook almost entirely when they so clearly have messed up. They have done that with juvenile aGVHD but that's not a new thing. They sometimes do it catastrophically. Thalidomide is only one example but it's not necessary to cast around too much to find others.

What concerns me is integrity and I found the FDA lacking but they are reforming. You have no enthusiasm at all for this. No enthusiasm either for the significance to the wider world. You're like a dog with its leg in a rabbit trap, biting anyone who comes near or in this case, engaging in false comforts.

I still find you lacking, mainly because of your lack of insight. it's almost like SI has pulled a rabbit out of a hat, so you have put a dead skunk on the table and directed me to apologise to you.

If in your world nothing matters except your personal suffering and paper losses, I can't give you advice.

But I'd warn you to rise above it. SI has not deliberately cheated you. He is not negligent either. No perfect maybe, who is, but the circumstances are very complex and you owe it to yourself to be fairer.

We are not long in this world, and if you can't find kindness in your heart, it's also your burden.

I can't respect what you've said about 'the kiddies', and much of how you carry on. I do ask you to stop, but if you will not decide to play fairer in your analysis of MSB, then expect me to give you no quarter.