Yeah I agree 100%, but ASIC don't have to prove it was...

Yeah I agree 100%, but ASIC don't have to prove it was intentional, just that it was likely to mislead or deceive. They're not concerned with the reasons. Representations from reps etc. might weigh in as mitigating factors in the magnitude of the punishment if ASIC succeed, but on the effectiveness on the human strain, they were give an opportunity to explain the original announcement and they changed it to effective against the feline strain. If they had data and evidence to back their claim at the time, that was the time to bring it in. Instead, what played out on the market was a rise in share price followed by a decline after the clarification announcement.

I do believe the company has a diverse range of good products, each with good future prospects, that's why I hold shares and continue to buy at low points. They just need to sort out the governance side of things, and I think that has improved since middle of 2020.