You’re again equating “not publicly published yet” with “never happened,” which is simply false in regulated medical development.
Animal studies conducted for regulatory submission are not obligated to be published, listed on university profile pages, or released on a retail timeline. In fact, many are explicitly not published until regulatory review is complete, because the data is part of an active IDE process and subject to confidentiality and sponsor control.
Key points you keep skipping:
• FDA does not require journal publication — it requires raw study data, protocols, endpoints, and controls.
• FDA would not issue deficiency letters or continue engagement if the studies didn’t exist or were “garbage.” They would terminate the program.
• Principal investigators are not required to list sponsor-controlled studies on public institutional pages, especially when data is under regulatory review. That is common, not suspicious.
• Self-publication accusations are irrelevant — FDA reviews datasets, not journal politics.
Calling everything you can’t see “junk” isn’t due diligence — it’s speculation filling gaps you don’t have access to.
Regulatory science isn’t run on message boards, and it isn’t validated by Google searches.
Same pattern.
Same assumptions.
No new facts.
Market Data 
Markets 
