I did mean well, thanks for assuming good intent here. I still don't understand how 9 of 28 could have the adverse event of malaria, though, given that other da

I did mean well, thanks for assuming good intent here. I still don't understand how 9 of 28 could have the adverse event of malaria, though, given that other data in the results show that 1 participant had what seemed to be a reinfection with a genetic match and 6 others were infected again with a parasite that didn't match their original infection's genetic makeup. That is 7 individuals, where do the other 2 come from? My uncertainty is that I may be misunderstanding the meaning of malaria as an adverse event entirely here - I don't get how reinfection would be an adverse event rather than a potential failure of treatment.