@Willhill What a spray. It's impressive at first but let's...

@Willhill What a spray.

It's impressive at first but let's deconstruct a bit shall we?

And separate the delivery method, TAVR (which is not theoretical but proven as a viable delivery method rather than via open heart surgery) with the valves.

Now it may well be true that you found some issues with development of the valve and patch technology. You hit hard and then admit that the early technology was not underperforming compared with other tech AND you aren't even sure that the supervising scientist was wrong in identifying causes other than the AHZ technology for the infant deaths. That's big of you.

And we all know that hospitals are extremely cautious and will conduct reviews routinely to determine cause of death.

You then distance yourself from the claims that the deaths were unrelated to the AHZ technology.

Now either they were or they weren't.

If they were, fair play to mention it. But you don't take that position at all. But the unavoidable impression is you wheel it out for a slur. Since the entire field is very sensitive and there's a lot around in the way of competitive jealousy.

So the basis of your claim is that tissue of the relevant animals cannot last any longer than their life expectancy.

It's certainly possible, but it's not axiomatic is it? On that basis, pig valves that were implanted in humans and failed after about that time 12 years or so, we should have just stayed with. Not possible to improve on them with any tissue sourced from them, is it??

Is it all about the source of the material (which in any case, has been modified)? Or is it the design? Or is it the delivery method?

You seem to conflate them and by doing so, seem unbothered . AFAIK the material has had the DNA stripped out; it's basically a scaffold.So there are no rejection issues. And the valve has been designed so it's much stronger than any competitor, or dare I say it, any sheep's valve.

How do you rationalise that the medical researcher who was behind the testing in sheep, was enthusiastic and put up his hand for the human trials?
He's not a nobody ....is he?

Lastly you do not know what happened when we were in suspension. None of us do. But claiming that nothing is going on and nobody wants the technology and it is of zero value contains a lot of assumptions. So nothing is underway. I'm not sure about that conclusion either.

I will say one thing though: points for effort.

What a shame it involves massive assumptions and leaps of logic and included in that the notion that the past always defines the present. I'm not so sure about that, particularly when it's an oversimplified version of the past, and a very sketchy view of the present.

This is a speculative stock and speculation can be expected. Interesting contribution though.

I don't have a large holding in AHZ but I'm certainly unlikely to sell on the back of your post. It doesn't have any references either.