IMO, we have a situation/case where M. cannot say the exact number of pts dosed for PDD/RSD, even though he certainly knows. He cannot say anything about the science path nor any new knowledge. If he did provide facts and then subsequently had even the most minor correction he would be criticized for sloppy whatever.
Certainly there are competitors and other interests (like Consortium members) who would like to know more. He is arguably sitting on the biggest single medical CNS mystery of the decade which even inadvertent disclosure could be explosive. Unless he can say all of it he cannot even act like he knows the answer, even a little peek presents risks. Meanwhile, the rest of us are sucking wind while results happen behind the curtain.
IMO, if there were data that indicated Homeostasis concept failure we would get a sense of it by delays, no new trials, no sense of urgency, no Consortiums or even others who wanted to join a consortium w/a loser. We would know. Or, it could be worse we could be lied to and mislead like the BIIB herd. Although this MB would see that whole thing in about 20 micro secs.
So, there is a process and it must be followed. The process is obviously broken, having produced only losses prior to PM discipline. It is what it is I guess. This is not a drill.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
