If you're not concerned with these miraculous pr's, you should be. They are modeled after stories found in the National Enquirer.
Not only are they completely unsubstantiated, they seem more like a pr from a company that is desperate. Investors (longs) want their money in companies that, no matter how small or new their product, at least the data is independently verified. If these results were verified by the FDA or AMA, this would have shot to $50/shr. Instead, it dropped 10%. The results are just too good to be true without independent certification.
That's why 1/4 of yesterday's volume was short and the rest of the volume was mostly selling. I was not short yesterday, it is not worth it with this current pps and low volume. I am waiting for a point to re-enter.
But after yesterday's pr, I'm really concerned. If these were the pr's that were expected last week, then nothing was lost. I really need to see who, how, and why these pr's were made, and who decided to make them public. Anyone that knows how to craft a successful pr, used these two pr's as examples in 'pr class' on what 'not to do'.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
