Member Info for LimaLiam

Yeah, that's what I thought really.

Well I think at this mornings prices (even the price now) it represents an opportunity. It does need another trial at least though.

Shame about all the value I (and many others) lost but it's time to backburner this for me.

Would we be looking at a successful trial right now? Do they have the power for a success in that endpoint there?

Yeah, bad day!

I've decided to buy more (if it drops to 15p). Wish me luck.

Yeah, take care guys.

Oh dear.

Bad day guys.

I'd love to know what you all did, if you're in a place mentally to share.

I'm sticking it out.

Cant say. My guess is no, but a bit late for hat

Use steroids alongside.

This was compared against standard of care.

*false

Yes, the faulse positive rumours have been worrying me a little. I was happier when all the lies were negative ones.

We are powerless to change the timing or outcome and so should be appropriately stoic about it.

Yes, data integrity. Which seems to be very important to them, perhaps they had some headwinds over the last couple of years.

But I'm not saying they didn't. Just that the point of a double bl8nd trial is usually not to look at data before final analysis.

Well if thats the case SYNGOLD...

They know for sure and all soft confirmations weve been seeing are VERY good news.

If it was dog**** we'd already know. Still think the hold up is (hopefully by tomorrow 'was') final data collection and clensing. It is a really complex trial from that point of view.

Matml, you are right there is option of interim analysis built in to the trial design. Whether they have used it or not I certainly have no idea and wouldn't guess either way, happy to hear what others think.

I think he is right, FACT.

That's that settled then.

Where does BG usually post? He seems to know what he is talking about and has a level head, that sounds like useful input thats worth receiving.

I believe you have to log every time you look at the data as each time you look at it you risk adding bias to the interpretation (fudging the results). You're called on it in peer review if youve been 'peeking' too many times.

Of course I could be wrong and the standard is to fudge data as much as possible.

I think BeforeGolf is right here.

I'm with NDN on this one. I literally had this coversation with someone who's job is exactly this. The takeaway was that 90% of the time spent is in data collection and cleaning (making sure its all correct). And as NDN stated, this is a much more complex trial than the usual if only 600 odd subjects.

You're a genius, Manifesto.

Well I'll be staying at the Harbour on sunday evening... Then trying my luck at 0630 on Monday.

Give NDN a break here, this seems like a really constructive and useful post to me.

Well night all, I look forward to seeing the results of my poll tomorrow morning.

All the best, fingers crossed it lands tomorrow!

Thanks Joe :)