(Total Views: 719)
Posted On: 03/07/2021 4:52:02 AM
Post# of 153886
Just listened to the Dr Been interview.
*** warning - this may sound like a soft bash , but its just someone frustrated. If you look at my past posts , especially when people were calling for early unblinding - i was not in favor for the exact reason we see now - trial size matters.
This post may even sound as random as some of that interview. so skip now.
I am so confused by this interview. NP really shouldn't be allowed to speak in front of people. He rust rambles.
Here is what I need help understanding :
- still no understanding why FDA (apparently) said no M/M - maybe they said - for M/M we need 2000 sample and NP went "oh, that sounds like a lot of money"... who knows
- for someone with a phd in mechanical engineering he should understand stats. Is there a reason he can't understand that scientists need data (usually a lot of it) for these types of tests.
- why are they only focusing on critical - why not go for S and C as 2 different populations. What we got was - why do 400 more (money?), instead of 2 at once, we will gamble on C and hope. My old boss used to say "hope is not a strategy".
- NP is always blaming others - ie the 200K vials to Philippines. Stop sounding like a CEO that has no clue how things work.
- the scary part is he promises constant video starting next week.
- on a medical show only talks stock price, his history with the company. Never about the science etc.
- the whole talk about raising money etc - thats just not needed here. why even say all that?
- no hearing about BLA for HIV etc.
- why no talk about S ?
- please publish the data from the trial about how it effected the cytokine storm?
- was the 6 day over everyone or just the 62 C's ?
I really wish we had a better team. There is a reason this company is an easy target for shorts.
PS. I have other questions - demoxy - at first glance wouldn't that interfere with LL ? Would that have effected the trial ?
*** warning - this may sound like a soft bash , but its just someone frustrated. If you look at my past posts , especially when people were calling for early unblinding - i was not in favor for the exact reason we see now - trial size matters.
This post may even sound as random as some of that interview. so skip now.
I am so confused by this interview. NP really shouldn't be allowed to speak in front of people. He rust rambles.
Here is what I need help understanding :
- still no understanding why FDA (apparently) said no M/M - maybe they said - for M/M we need 2000 sample and NP went "oh, that sounds like a lot of money"... who knows
- for someone with a phd in mechanical engineering he should understand stats. Is there a reason he can't understand that scientists need data (usually a lot of it) for these types of tests.
- why are they only focusing on critical - why not go for S and C as 2 different populations. What we got was - why do 400 more (money?), instead of 2 at once, we will gamble on C and hope. My old boss used to say "hope is not a strategy".
- NP is always blaming others - ie the 200K vials to Philippines. Stop sounding like a CEO that has no clue how things work.
- the scary part is he promises constant video starting next week.
- on a medical show only talks stock price, his history with the company. Never about the science etc.
- the whole talk about raising money etc - thats just not needed here. why even say all that?
- no hearing about BLA for HIV etc.
- why no talk about S ?
- please publish the data from the trial about how it effected the cytokine storm?
- was the 6 day over everyone or just the 62 C's ?
I really wish we had a better team. There is a reason this company is an easy target for shorts.
PS. I have other questions - demoxy - at first glance wouldn't that interfere with LL ? Would that have effected the trial ?
(6)
(0)
