Biotech Time?, page-11

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and allowed to hypothesis on potential outcomes BUT I must say this is not a good one and shows a low EQ investing thought process given it is counterintuitive for all shareholders, including PR himself.

From multiple decades of experience I generally put the legal and medical profession in the same bucket when it comes to behaviour finance.

The sky is not falling in here despite the share price and if you read the half yearly you may pick up on some excellent detail on 002 - Stage 1:

"....did not meet the prespecified performance threshold, which was based on prior efficacy outcomes using the 2mg/kg twice-weekly dosing demonstrated in PARA_005 and PARA_OA_008"

Dosage 1.5mg/kg x 2 worked BUT did not work at the same level as 2mg/kg x2 on our primary end point - pain and function

The penny has dropped as I was starting to doubt myself why it was possible 1.5mg/kg x 2 didn't work at all. That's is NOT what phase 1 showed rather it confirmed 2mg/kg x 2 is minimum dosage required to get most "optimal result"