This really does test the definitions of initiation, site initiation, beginning of study.
I agree that if a company puts in an IR that they have initiated a study, then it is at that time point that the company can be held accountable for the amount of time required to complete the study.
If accountability does not start at the announcement, then the announcement is nothing more than a publicity stunt.
Using terms like "world wide" are not quantitative, but are intended to spike investor interest.
I am not a judge or jury, but my gut feeling is that Jake's sentiment about the prolonged study period is correct. I do see a path for approval of an RSV therapeutic in spite of a vaccine.
I would feel better if Enanta could propose a possible use for the NASH assets even (or especially) if outside of NASH.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
