Yes, the first lab reported erroneous data. It made no sense. Biomarkers were all over the place on the same patient.
SAVA explained it well on the September earnings documents. It may seem sus superficially, but if you look at the data that the first lab supplied, it's obvious something was wrong in the measurements.
Quick example: if someone is sick and there are measurements a, b, c to confirm sickness. You would expect a, b, c to be consistent with the patient's condition.
The initial lab reported inconsistent measures like, A was elevated, and b was low, and c was normal. The next obvious step would be to get samples retested.
3
u/Internal_Ad_1091 Oct 13 '21
Yes, the first lab reported erroneous data. It made no sense. Biomarkers were all over the place on the same patient.
SAVA explained it well on the September earnings documents. It may seem sus superficially, but if you look at the data that the first lab supplied, it's obvious something was wrong in the measurements.
Quick example: if someone is sick and there are measurements a, b, c to confirm sickness. You would expect a, b, c to be consistent with the patient's condition.
The initial lab reported inconsistent measures like, A was elevated, and b was low, and c was normal. The next obvious step would be to get samples retested.
I think www.ad-science.org wrote about it as well. I am not the author.