Brian

The ideal would be a joint response from the heavy hitters of the Annual Report all pointing out that saying the CR rationale ignores facts on HPV. the logical conclusion from their premises:no testing needed except for HPV "high risk" is that no oral cancer detection tests are needed because HPV is not a big deal for cancer. But too remote to motivate quickly enough

But a well written press release from you, with perhaps a few backup quotes from one of ADA or Oral Hygiene groups expressing low key disappointment that CR did not at least give you the white blank circle that accurately represents the Federal conclusions especially with no reason given and the misleading impression that the feds backed this. Then address their stated reason, we are too small to matter. Raise the real numbers, the trends, and cite Annual Report.
Mention Gillison, OCF's history in HPV, and then suggest that as penance: Consumer Reports advocate the HPV vaccine, for boys and girls, free just like where Karen lives. That with vaccination- again drag in the Annual Report - testing would not be needed. Or that CR does an HPV report in conjunction with OCF.
Tomorrow, I'll send you an email with a rough draft of the above - do with it what you will.
Charm