RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:News and update I really hope that this isn't a possibility but they did put out an NR after the dispute over the license agreement began saying basically that Accudata had analyzed the data and no significant difference was measured between the patients treated with placebo or ACP. The reduction in ulcer size was offset by the formation of new ones. The common answer for this from hem investors is that they put out that NR to mislead anyone paying attention and to basically make hemostemix think that the treatment was not worth fighting over while simultaneously taking sole ownership of the IP. So if the data clearly shows otherwise, then they would be shown to have outright lied to investors. But you're right, it's probably worse to be caught tampering with data, than to be caught claiming your own product doesn't work. Or there is the very real possibility that they weren't lying and that ACP's effectiveness dissappears under larger control groups with less bias than the previous small trials. Who knows but it doesn't hurt to explore possibilities