We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
My question is why if it is a double blind placebo controlled trial where you've stated in an interview that you're not going to take the option of the interim review, do all the very minor share holders think you knew the results of the trial months before recieving them from the data processor?
There's ne option of no TR1, as in they chose not to react. It seems as likely as offloading or taking on more, but that's my opinion. It should be supportive (not as much as if they bought into the fall) but no idea what we will see.
Hope for a TR1 showing an increase. I'll wish I bought more when it was stupid cheap if that's the case.
I agree with snow, almost all evidence pointed in the right direction. It was a percentage play and we caught the wrong side of it. It was a very good value bet, we just lost I'm afraid.
It's not all over yet, but pretty well done.
Dont beat yourselves up, that wont change anything. It's good that we can talk here with otheres that understand, with minimal interference from parasitic trolls.
NDN, it was close but no cigar on one of the secondary.
So needs more data unfortunately, unless somehow a government can find a way to see past that enough to give an EUA but that seems like a long shot.
P.S. Pretty sure your question was rhetorical now Ive typed all that.
I cant say if it will reach 3 figures again, but my strategy is to hold tight, I bought more this morning to try to soften the blow.
It was a big hit though and I did not enjoy reading the RNS.
Takeaway for me is I should have been set up to take advantage of a failed trial before the RNS was released.
Re power: for the endpoint I wS look8ng at is was 0.119 and 0.135 (depending on standard of care or not).
I'd be interested to see the significance if those two groups were combined. It's the same endpoint, but would significantly increase the data sample. Speculation at this point.