Member Info for Scinv_temp

And still it's ludicrous to call that "stress testing" lol

In that dataset, there were 11 events (progression/death) in placebo and 3 in treatment.

Lmao he called picking a handful of patients with certain characteristics (a post hoc subgroup analysis), "stress testing the data". A spin doctor of the poor.

I meant sportstrader's post

100% on point

Aim is full of silly traders that treat it as a betshop

Bit off topic, but any examples of those biotechs trading below their cash balance? Strange the analyst suggests there are several of them.

Andinio, exactly. I increased my holding by 15% after that silly article about nomad, and not even going to trade them out to reduce risk (not advice, just my personal opinion).

I think the ****** is whoever lost a truckload of money here

Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and George Soros, after they have serviced RMs member to pay their respects. Lol this board

OK, it was alpha-dog. Potatoe/potato

To be clear, from what I have seen, conpany did not say they will seek eua based on this data. That would have been misleading. You did though

Prion, 2 things

1. It's exploratory, it becames unethical (p-hacking) to the point that it is used to mislead about the importance of it.

2. The point of my post is that they did not find a definitive benefit with the post hoc analysis. They found another signal, perhaps a better one this time but that is subject to a clinical trial where those populations are pre defined. If it was p value of 0.001 then maybe they would get an eua (but still subject to getting the actual trial going).

Lmao. That is exactly what I'm pointing out.

Aloha: that was written at a time when they wanted to calm people down. Unfortunately it led to dubious approvals, like remdesivir. The context isn't the same anymore.

I know they cherry picked it because that's the only thing they can do after ther trial. Lol

You have contributed to burning a lot of people here. No shame usually comes with no brain so not much of a surprise. You fools were tooting back then that no one else can use inhalable ifnb when in fact others have been doing that even before sng who does not own either ifnb (or any other ifn) or the process of nebulising it.

Well, I know it doesn't work that way.

Well, actually, that's not how it works. If that was on the prespecified population and endpoints it would have been marginal but at least passing the threshold. Now now cherry picked the variables after the trial. That's exploratory (in this case more like data dredging/p-hackimg) and it doesn't have the same value at all.

RM should never have presented in scientific conferences in the first place. He is not a scientist.