$SAVA, Cassava Sciences, Inc. / H1 After having some time to reflect for the past few weeks and over this weekend, more and more folks are realizing that the petition just doesn't have anything close to any teeth (heck, not even gums) for halting p3. Even the (initially) bearish people are at least starting to admit p3 halt is quite unlikely now (with for some few exceptions who are either incredibly stubborn or failed to do much due diligence if any--and you know who you are).First, the petition doesn't even raise a single safety concern, while the fda primarily (or even *only*--as sts66 pointed out) cares about safety when determining p3 clinical holds. This alone should be reason for fda to toss the petition into the trash can, if they haven't already (after giving a courtesy call to the petitioners' lawyer).Second, the fda is very well aware of the fact that ~90% or more petitions are used as anticompetitive tactics, and they will take that into account. In this case, the delayed disclosure of short interests after the sp already took an enormous hit; failure to provide any non-public info that a true insider whistleblower would be able to provide; waiting all these months and years to strike right when the sp was reaching back to all time highs and SPA for p3 (remember that their primary argument concerns the western blots done 10+ years ago); and so on.Third, the accusations of fraud in the petition do not touch upon recently demonstrated and encouraging (though not conclusive) evidence of efficacy. Rather, the petition attacks the MoA, or points to clerical errors and then massively jumps to the conclusion of fraud. Specifically, the petitioners rely on western blots (related to MoA), dead human brain tissue (again MoA), and clerical errors (in the SavaDx(!) poster, not even the simufilam one). For the western blots, there is mounting counter-evidence that the blots do NOT indicate fraud, since the the similarities, halos, and so on are normal artifacts when using technology (used at the time) (e.g., www.siliconinvestor.com/... ad-science.org/... And more importantly, someone not finding the MoA not convincing/unfamiliar/too novel is not grounds for halting p3. As many others have said, even approved drugs' MoAs are not well understood (e.g., Tylenol). Regarding the dead human brain tissue issue, this was debunked already weeks ago; the way sava handled the brain tissue was standard procedure, as stated in the first press release after the petition came out. Again, MoA is not reason for halting p3. Finally, the petition begs the fda to halt p3 for simufilam..based on clerical errors on the poster for SavaDx! Those are not even the same thing lol. Perhaps realizing these severe weaknesses of their accusations, the petition's lawyer has filed supplements, which contain references to tweets by Bik et al. Yes, tweets. The supplements even contain emails from the lawyer to the fda, and those emails are framed as "technical" documentation. Folks doing proper knowledge would've recognize the supplementation as pathetic and downright desperate. Some of those without due diligence seem to blindly trusting Bik et al. because they sound authoritative. What a circus.When picked apart like this based on (hours and hours of) due diligence, one can realize that the petition has really nothing. The uninformed investors may have been scared away. Or worse, sold at the recent bottom (mid 40s). But thanks to the recent events, those doing their due diligence are starting to realize that there is evidence of management actually being honest and doing things properly (although they may not proofread things very carefully--perhaps clumsy, but not fraudulent). For example, if sava is a fraud, why did sava nonetheless decide to publicly announce the first failed p2b when they were not even required to, thereby choosing to adhere to the scenitiifc principle of reporting everything rather than cherry picking what to report and what to put in a file drawer? Because they're a fraud but also like to leave hints that will help them get caught--they just enjoy that kind of thrill? For the fraud theory to still hold rather than fall apart, it requires weird or far-fetched assumptions like this.The above materials are just a summary of reasons why the petition and accusations are clearly ridiculous or highly ambiguous at best. Now, the issue of whether sava will move forward with p3 and other upcoming catalysts (e.g., potential partnership) is different from whether p3 results will be a success leading to approval. It's important not to get religious into believing that p3 is guaranteed to work out perfectly. Though drugs reaching all the way to p3 (i.e., smaller denominator) have a higher likelihood of final success than just all drug candidates (i.e., larger denominator), there's still a risk of disappointment, and to prepare for that, one could book profits along the way, sell the news entirely, or even short (this last option would require a ton of knowledge and research because if you short heavily and p3 is a success, you can end up owing a virtually limitless amount of money as the sp shoots up compulsively). But that's at least 1-2 years out from today. In the near / intermediate term (e.g., by the end of this year or early next year), the potential upside far exceed any remaining downside potential. And what's clear for right now is that the petition is bogus, and virtually zero chance of a p3 halt.notes from a user