For the Sake of Argument
Brace yourself. I am about to say something that may scare some of us, but rest assured I am very much long SAVA with shares and calls. What I am about to say is for the sake of an argument, meaning I don't agree with it, but I will say so I can explore the point I want to make. For the sake of making an argument (remember I don't agree with this), let's assume that Dr. Wang faked some or part or even all of his research. Does that mean, Simufilam is a fake? No. Why is that? We have published data from a 12 month open label study where the average cognition improvement on the ADAS-COG11 is an amazing 3+. I have a shocking theory that a disease that rapidly ravages the mind that you can't fake placebo over 12 months. I also have this shocking theory that when the AVERAGE improvement is 3+ and that multiple testing sites were utilized (such as IMIC that is or has been doing clinical trials for AstraZeneca, Biogen, and Eli Lilly) that we can trust the data is in fact correct. Twitter PhDs will criticize the mechanism of action and say surely Simufilam can't actually help AD, but there is a substantial list of drugs with unknown mechanism of action that produce positive health outcomes for humans. Simply put, we don't know how they work, but they do and many are being used on a daily basis from things such as: narcolepsy, sleep apnea, shift work sleep disorder, alcohol use disorder, alertness, attention, wakefulness, positive mood, inflammation, depression, and allergic reaction. The list goes on and on, but for the sake of brevity we can confidently assert there are many drugs that produce a positive health benefit, but we simply do not know exactly what they are doing in the body to produce that. But we know they work! So, with everything going on I am drawn to making parallels between Les Misérables and real life. Read on and you will see where I am going with this. In the story of Les Misérables, Jean Valjean, prisoner, 24601, spent 19 years as a slave of the law -5 years for the loaf of bread he stole for his starving niece and another 14 years for trying to run. When he is finally issued his parole, he is asked if he knows what it means and he says, "Yes, it means I'm free", to which the cruel law officer Javert tells him "No!" and he will bear this badge of shame (identification paper) that will tell everyone he is a dangerous man. With this being his only state issued ID he will be unable to find work anywhere (no one will hire a former inmate) and so he steals some silver from a priest. He is caught and the priest in his mercy tells those who caught Jean Valjean that the silver was a gift. He tells Jean Valjean that with the silver he has bought his soul for God and that he must reform his life. And that is what he does! Jean Valjean used the silver to buy a new identity. He used the silver to create a factory where he employs women and becomes the mayor of the small town he resides in. Through a twist of events he ends up adopting the child of a dead prostitute and he will care for her like his own daughter. Well, Javert eventually discovers that Jean Valjean had taken up a new life. Instead of seeing the good Jean Valjean has done: employing women in a time when employment opportunities were limited for women, adopting the child of a prostitute, and serving his community as their mayor, Javert goes after Valjean with a holy sense of justice. The good that Jean Valjean has done is completely meaningless to Javert. Now, we can't peer inside the heart of Valjean to see what mechanism of action caused him to go from petty criminal to a wonderful man, but something did happen. I personally know people that have killed others (decades ago) and if you met them today you would see that pure charity and compassion are in their eyes and in their actions. That is what we must judge anything or any person by. The result of their action - are they good or bad results? But sometimes they take time to prove. Just like Valjean has documentable evidence of creating positive change in the lives of others, Simufilam has documentable evidence of creating positive change in the lives of AD patients. We think we know how it works, but the Twitter PhDs say nobody actually knows how it works or IF it works. Au contraire (fancy French for on the contrary), we do know that Simufilam is having a very positive effect from those suffering the daily hell of having their memories erased in a terrifying and confusing bit by bit manner. The critics think that placebo effect is still in operation, but that simply cannot be. Simufilam's medical properties are causing a positive change in the lives of others. And to try and prevent Simufilam from completing its phase 3 is something that only a modern day Javert would do. So, going back to my point that I said at the beginning. So what if Dr. Wang's research was a complete fraud (I don't think it was, but for the sake of argument I will agree it was). If his foundational work is a fraud, yet the drug creates a huge benefit as documented by numerous clinical trial sites, why would you stop it? Remember, placebo effect doesn't exist after 12 months. for a disease like AD. To QCM and the Twitter PhDs, are you modern cruel Javerts? Why can you not see the good of Simufilam? Why must you continue to fight that which is showing to be possibly one of the most promising drugs to treat AD ever? Is your profit motive, through your short position, the real reason why you are trying desperately to prevent Simufilam from continuing to prove its good works? Just like Javert sought to stop the reformed/good Jean Valjean with an almost fanatical obsession, it looks like that is what you are trying to do here as well. I think your pure avarice is on display and it will not age well as more data comes out to support the medical benefits of Simufilam.