Kraig Biocraft Laboratories Inc (KBLB)

[ZincFinger]

IMHO that's a good question to submit to the CC.

From what I've seen it appears to be a fairly common practice to quote only selected information from such testing (check a few other companies websites). There are a number of possible reasons, some innocent, some not:

A company may want to emphasize it's strengths and not get attention diverted to characteristics that may not be very relevant to its intended commercial uses (such independent testing often comes in standard panels which list a lot of qualities. [[Note that research is heavily directed toward improving commercially relevant properties so results on non relevant properties are generally not so good]] Quoting a singe very important and good figure has a more powerful impact than the same figure lost among a dozen or so other figures which may all be not nearly so good but of little commercial significance to the product in question.

OTOH, there could be other figures which ARE relevant and which are "other than good".

What it boils down to is that you can trust the figures given (very few CEOs would be so extraordinarily stupid as to publish false data!). But you have to trust the company insofar as what may NOT have been given. As explained above, the lack of inclusion of other figures in and of itself does not indicate a problem And given the way that most companies post their data (I havent' seen any that post a full report) that's probably an inescapable reality.

The hardest part of investing is dealing with what is NOT said! That's where the real and unavoidable uncertainty comes in.

Note that for things like "feel" and "texture" (which are where some of Monster Silk's most remarkable properties apparently were and are some of the most important for the silk garments and accessories market) there are no (AKAIK) objective measures. We'd have to wait for the customers to rule on that one.