Buildit, I have to correct your inference. I did n

Buildit, I have to correct your inference. I did not conclude any malicious intent; I simply offered it as one alternative (in addition to incompetence or negligence), and suggested that as far as I am aware, an investigation would not completely halt the ongoing activities of any company, unless there was some suspicion of an ongoing criminal enterprise. I did not ascribe that scenario to these companies, or the board/executives.

Again, if someone else has an alternative, rational, positive explanation for the evidence to date (i.e., no communications, downward-spiraling SP, no proof of revenue from any product or service (not including investments from the Asian activities, as those are not revenue, by definition, any more than dilution is), unfulfilled promises (e.g., not even a photo of the AZ build-out being completed), no confirmation from an independent source of any alleged activity (e.g., FDA acknowledgement of IND submission)), I would be interested in considering it, especially if there is any historical precedent for comparable evidence eventually leading to a profitable company.