" If they had say 95% accuracy and were trying to improve it to 97% would the pr fit? I think yes."
Talk about putting wishful words into a purposely vague PR! Don't stop there! Tell us that they are at 99% going for 99.5% because as any pink sheet investor would agree, "well he didn't say it wasn't 99%, so let's assume it is!"
Unbelievable!
A 5% variance, that Bozo mentions, has NOTHING to do with accuracy. It can be consistently wrong, with little variance, and it probably is. But the line is there to fool those naive enough to just assume that is what the 5% means! Since this is the pink/grays, it can and will work!!!!
The obvious truth to everyone but DECN shareholders is that IF it were 95% accuracy he would have said so, in writing! So the fact he didn't means it's BELOW that number, probably WAY below it.
Next, are you going to tell us that the fact he waited a month to tell us that a decision between 2 labs that was so close that it was to be "announced in days", is, a month later, now between 3 labs, and they don't even know whether one or two will be chosen, has a bright side too?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
