You are the one making all the negative assertions, so you...

You are the one making all the negative assertions, so you should be the one to substantiate your claims with hard evidence.

"withdrawn OIL from attending and participation from the global Light Microscopy Conference to be held in Sydney"

Why would OIL be the one to attend and participate in this? Surely that would be the role of Carl Zeiss if the wish to promote their technology?

"I'm almost certain that Carl Zeiss was talked about and had either exclusivity or an option on Breast Cancer, maybe they even had this exclusivity as one of their markets."

What on earth are you talking about? How can any entity have "exclusivity or an option on breast cancer"?

"And why are Carl Zeiss or Dr Peter Delaney not involved or mentioned as a partner or supporter of this clinical trial?"

What are you seeking to imply here?

It looks like you are trying to spin some kind of negative narrative over a positive development.