Meirluc,
I can buy that, but I believe that the subject matter of the conference would have permitted the Journal, which will discuss the results of the trial, but not a discussion of the way treatment is going in the future. I believe that Dr. Bosch could speak to the subject of the conference very well with, or without the Journal, but without it would have been hard pressed not to reveal information that's not deemed to be appropriate until TLD and the Journal is issued. It would have put him in a very awkward position.
As I see it, Dr. Bosch is ideally positioned to discuss the future, at least the part of it that's covered by the development of DCVax-Direct which wouldn't be covered by the Journal at all. As I understand it, this is really his baby, I don't know if Dr. Liau or others worked on it at all, though it builds on what's created by DCVax-L. If I'm wrong about this, please correct me, I'm going by memory of what I believe others have said.
I believe that when the Journal is published there will be no shortage of conferences that we'll attend, many will be Institutional or Brokerage conferences, but technical conferences will be interested as well provided something new can be added to the discussion. If the survivors in the trial are still being tracked I believe presenting a few years of additional survivor information would satisfy most conferences. I cannot say if the Journal is purely based on the data to the date of data lock, or if Dr. Liau included information that brings it up to date.
Whether it's next week, or later this month, or next month, I don't believe it will be that much longer, more importantly I really believe it will be worth the wait.
Gary
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
