Cardioprotection thread, page-405

It's hard to be too concerned about this as they haven't provided data on dosing regimes or the results from the individual cell lines tested.

To your other point regarding IP sacrifice; > 6 months ago I would have agreed with you. RAC had effectively fallen flat on its face. We missed target dates and failed to deliver the new formulation. An ex-director departed and was presented with an opportunity to throw us under the bus. It was looking grim! A bad deal, early patent lodgement etc. might have turned it around, anything to validate the opportunity to the market and stave off third-party hostility. But, to management's credit, they didn't falter. They stayed the path and weathered the storm. That ex-director hasn't thrown us under the bus. We're now on the other side and it appears to be full steam ahead. To suggest this remains the course of action totally discredits what all shareholders have been through and where we are today.

We were lucky enough to get a peek behind the curtain with Doan et al, and we've got close ties to the leadership of the International Cardio Oncology Society. We can see the commercialisation strategy unfolding in front of us. The rerating SP is a protection against hostilities, so why not allow them the opportunity to remain silent (publicly) for a few short months until CPACS is ready to recruit?