I sense the resolution of a behind-the-scenes conflict.Reading...

I sense the resolution of a behind-the-scenes conflict.

Reading between the lines I suspect that there was conflict between Storf and Trevisan, which resulted in Trevisan leaving.  The board (appears to have) subsequently decided that Storf was not up to the job of progressing the company.  Thus out with the new and in with the old.

If I'm right (and there's no guarantee that I am) then this is a positive move:

1. With Trevisan aboard: stitching up distributorships, obtaining certifications, arranging home trials, liaising with autism support organisations, engaging the Carrick Institute to conduct the study.
2. Without Trevisan: relying almost entirely on the Carrick Institute study results with very little other action.  It's possible that the product redesign and manufacturing agreement was a Storf win or whether that had also been instigated by Trevisan.  We probably won't ever know.
3. Storf leaves, then some weeks later Trevisan arrives.  It would seem that Trevisan absolutely refused to return until Storf was well gone.

It will be interesting to see how things develop now.