thanks for posing various questions in the CC amd writing back...

thanks for posing various questions in the CC amd writing back here. Far better calibre of investment forum posting than the nakedly greedy. All holders want it to do well, the question is the approach. Intellectual integrity in this regard (synonymous with critical thinking) is logically the most prudent posture. This can aid delineation of investment noise and signal, just as it does in terms of robust sound engineering of the ED noise vs signal issue, as well as spurious cough from a parent or nurse.

I worry about the way this forum platform appears slanted to positive bias. There is no red arrow. Perhaps there should be no green tick? Way too many people get burned here. It isn't kind, even if those very people were the types to mock dissenters right before the immolation of their investment.

In terms of confidence intervals, the wording in the CC should be noted. It sounded like the view that they weren't necessary could be taken several ways. The way I understood that to mean was not necessary for progression to FDA. They were worked out internally and yes, availability of that data would be nice.

I may not post for much longer, not sure it is worth it in the Australian jurisdiction.