CQ is just a different MPAC amongst the 2000+ Prana have to work...

CQ is just a different MPAC amongst the 2000+ Prana have to work with. My issue was not about quoting CQ. I have done it many times myself. My issue was that he felt he could preach that microbleeds and brain swelling which are still happening with some MABs, should not be discussed because one company which had the issue has been bought out and the drug failed. The fact of the matter is that drug failed after the top dose had been eliminated due to those microbleeds(ARIA) In hindsight they may have been able to show some efficacy if they had left that high dose in the trial. Those bleeds also happen in non treated patients for various reasons, and the discussion a few years back, as I remember, was mainly about accepting patients into trials who already had some ARIA, to expand the pool of patients who could enter a trial.
The company did not close its doors, but was bought out by Perrigo in 2013 for $8.6B
Then he felt free to discuss CQ, a drug dumped by Prana over a decade ago.
Poor logic. Prana's trial failed. Blame me if you like PBT2 has yet to be trialled in a trial powered to detect cognition in AD. From Colin Masters poster presentation we now know the recruitment error which led to the non conclusive result in plaque reduction. That can happen when you are at the cutting edge of a technology.