Cytodyn Inc (CYDY)

[stockorus]

Replying to select tweets is not setting record straight. It is using the platform in an ambiguous and extremely limited manner to give as much/little information as he wants and no further if he does not want; a PR campaign of sorts which can damage his credibility at this point (since he has joined 13-D). Some internet guy says this is what Nader is insinuating about Dr. BP, then Dr. BP acknowledges the same as if factual and negates it in a partial and confusing manner.

Even then, he can do that independently in his own tweets (or formal letter) and in a complete manner - if that is really his intention. Given that he has joined the 13-D team which is trying to put up a professional case for why management needs change, Dr. BP also needs to be professional and commit in his way of response if he wants to be taken seriously. If he wants to support that team, then pinpoint the possible charges that he feels Nader (and pro-management investors) is making with regard to his role in RO (and other interactions with Cytodyn), and refute them systematically and thoroughly by stating what exactly he did during his partnership with Cytodyn and what he did not.

Otherwise it comes across as being suspect and partial.

I accept his tweet on him not having anything to do with dosage being 2; but the RO reply leaves one wanting of details.

Exactly! Finally someone has found the truth! Second we used PRO140 for our RO assay so if it didn’t work that means PRO140 must not bind to CCR5. Hint-it does and it’s a great assay. https://t.co/bBhbGVCiWU

— Bruce K. Patterson MD (@brucep13) July 6, 2021