Dr. Bosch is the CTO, and of course he would be listed on there. But the paper is authored by 70 authors who did not just sing whatever the company told them to sign. No, the primary author was rather those doctors and I am sure Dr. Liau and Dr. Ashkan had primary authorship responsibilities.
You can keep trying to twist this as if it is something unusual. None of it is.
There was no “omission”. The details are there, you just wanted it to be said in language that validated your short hypothesis. That never happens and it has nothing to do with the science. The details are told exactly and completely as they occurred. There was no halt for safety, if you wished to see that, that would be a lie. It appears that there was a deficit of placebo patients, and that was likely due to the realization that with so many patients having crossed over, the placebo arm was not fit for purpose. The halt was partial and appears to have been about that to me. Why would they delay treatment for patients that want it, where patients are living longer if the placebo arm is no longer a fit for purpose tool?
Plus it was so late in the trial, but had very little impact on the total number for the trial from the original plans. The results are the results. Complain to Dr. Liau and Dr. Ashkan… but rather shorts complain to shareholders. If there was academic fraud, which is what you are suggesting, make a claim and see where that gets you. But have lawyers ready to take fire not just from NWBO, but likely from the relevant academic institutions and doctors. And the claims for defamation likely would be valid in the UK as well. I can’t wait to see what happens. Go for it.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
