From the perspective of a doctor or health system offering or suggesting to try a therapeutic option, i can imagine that this article would dampen enthusiasm for participation, regardless of any potential fine points. Definitely published evidence of worse results in the lungs of rats, witgiut clearly delineated positve results in alternate situations to offset and clarify this news, might make a human less likely to want to try this.

That said, the oral lavage method of delivery would seem to have a higher likelihood of going to lung vs injection, especially with a frightened & struggling rat. Not sure how such a dosing method is actually carried out.

One can imagine that there would probably now need to be more successful animal trials to distinguish how and when to administer this drug and show positive results before there is much enthusiasm for trial enrollment.

In light of Don's last (youtube) talks somewhat downplaying rhe relative importance of the covid program vs  the "main" cardiovascular  program, ths study having reached them sooner than the rest of us would make some sense.

I return to my earlier disgust over trial design - when it became clear that they had not designed the study to even evaluate  benefits against long covid, where apabetalone seemed most likely to shine.