First, the western blots are actually the #1 issue the petition discusses, not just part of the petition. It's their "strongest" argument, which is consistent with the fact they listed as first in the petition (see p. 2). Yet their #1 argument is at best ambiguities. For instance, Bik et al. have pointed to things like "irregular spacing" without specifying who regular they're supposed to be.Trade SAVA on T2BF platform. $SAVA, Cassava Sciences, Inc. / H1 Second, the petition complains about "no other lab" has done work on simufilam's purported MoA. Later they complain about how they find the purported MoA hard to believe or suspicious. Since when did the fda require solid proof of MoA for deciding to halt p3, and how is someone's dislike/suspicion for an MoA evidence of fraud? Third, there's the complaint about using post mortem human brain tissue (how it "defies logic")--which sava explained away in their original press release. It's funny how the online accusers don't talk about this plainly debunked allegation. The accusers only seem to be interested in putting spotlight on allegations they perceive to still hold potential while ignoring the ones shown to be wrong. So it's hard to truly perceive them as neutral unbiased academics who are acting solely on concerns of scientific integrity. I'm not saying they are getting bribed or anything (let's try to stick to the facts without going into tin foil hat wearing conspiracy). But even from a non financial perspective, there seems to be a tendency in places like twitter to do pile-ons blindly because it just gives some folks a sense of power and entertainment.Wait: Trade SAVA on T2BF platform. Fourth, the several inconsistencies in the poster--were explained as errors by sava. It indicates lack of proofreading and sloppiness, but not even close to establishing fraud. Again, the burden of proof for establishing fraud is on the petition. The FDA certainly does not have unlimited resources; they're not gonna act on any and every petition pointing to errors and lines in figures out of place and use their resources to dig deeper to try to establish deliberate data fabrication/fraud. What a terrible and burdensome precedent would that be, opening a floodgate for large amounts of additional work. Their main concern is safety for p3 trial halt. There's no proof so far of fraud, and there's no proof of safety concerns. Finally, the p2b reversal as somehow indicating fraud. If sava is a mastermind of fraud, why not fabricate on the first p2b attempt, especially when protocol documents show Wang was involved in the analyses of both attempts! Again, not even close to evidence of fraud. P3 continues to move on, with now 26 sites established. The fraud theory gets weaker by the day, while the only thing getting stronger are the mass hysteria and accusations online (e.g., the accusation that the new building may be Remi's money laundering operation) which further discredits the accusers.notes from a user