Thanks for your update and the important information you shared.
It seems my post was unclear-- I was responding to an earlier post that suggested Daval stopped the trial in actuality due to poor results, but attributed it to a protocol deviation. What I was saying was that if that was truly the case (and there were poor results), they would still have finished the trial, witnessing the very public failures of the companies I mentioned. They would not have invented an excuse-- in other words, what they said should likely be taken at face value.
As to my comment about users also being investors: My point is that investors must be told what the real story is with a clinical trial failure, while patients do not necessarily have that right. Given some investors were also patients, my prediction was that we would soon hear the truth as to the mysterious cancellation. And thanks to you, we have.
Hope this makes sense now,
Disclaimer: Any information you find on this site should not be considered medical advice. All decisions should be made with the consent of your doctor, otherwise you are at your own risk.