"Show me where I put words in Smyth's mouth."
"Her reply echoed that scope of language. It was NOT a denial of DCVax-L's broader potential or mechanism of actions across caner types."
Implying she didn't mean it was only for glioblastoma, which she did, is putting words (or alternate meaning) in her mouth.
show me where she uses the word "scope"
"You're the one interpreting what she "meant"- not me."
what she said was "for glioblastoma", how am I interpreting that wrong. ?
"So why won’t you acknowledge that this mechanism directly supports the position that DCVax-L is cancer agnostic?"
It very well may be, but they only applied for glioblastoma.