I admit I know very little about the science but I

I admit I know very little about the science but I do know there has been a lot of reference to sensitivity and specificity numbers that were expected to be in the 95% range and then we're given partial data with a number of 80% and told that it can be tweaked higher.

Then it's suggested that we focus on a "p value" of .003 as being a fantastic number.

Just admit that the manner in which the data was handled was a farce. Obviously the market thought so. Now the challenge for Gerald is to communicate the results in a believable manner that will help to salvage his credibility and the share price.

If you don't think his credibility is on the line here then you are in denial.