I already pointed out to Alpha my concerns about the longterm assumption of survival for control in the document I did read. You are talking about two different things.
I am not talking about your issue with comparator data assumptions.
I am talking about the output of his model which is simply clearly way, way wrong. And it is not posted vs linked, as all the numbers are the same in the two versions.
No matter what you assume, there can not be 21 alive on the control arm at 9 years. If every patient was cured day 1, it would only be 7.
Equally wrong is his model prediction that all alive on the control arm (except 1) were enrolled 27-35 months ago. Some will be longer and some shorter.
The point is that this is not a model, as such could never generate such errant results. It is simply making up curves and saying "look, this shows it works". And getting the mandatory agreement about how good the results are.