They have already stated that the results from the first preclinical were very positive. Now, instead of stating whether the results of the second trial are good, or bad, they state nothing and initiate a third test. IMO if the results were not favorable in the third test, they would have stated some of the positives from trial two. They are purposely not releasing testing information at this point. A close friend (MD/oncology) is attending the conference in Chicago this weekend. She said the companies are like "vultures" with their products, including big and small pharmas. The release of the third trial was strategically released the Friday before. Also, let's not forget Mr. Liquard coming on board towards the end of the second trial. So, as stated earlier, why would a CEO/Pfizer guy choose to join a board w a bad product. It's kinda like a CSI episode. You gotta try to connect the dots. And go......bashes