KenChowder, I think you are erudite enough :).
Post# of 155528
(Total Views: 546)
Posted On: 12/30/2020 10:04:26 AM
Re: KenChowder #70271
KenChowder,
I think you are erudite enough
.
Yes, there are some papers published in which it is reported that with the improved SOC deaths (S/C patients) have gone down to the 10% range. We know 23% of all patients died in the first half, and NP mentioned more than 50 by the time he did a CC on 10/20/20 if my memory serves me well. Somebody mentioned 54 but not sure where this info came from.
In any case. Following your suggestion, ran two possible scenarios: 23 and 16 more deaths in the second half of our trial on top of the 45 already reported.
This means only 11.8% (23/195) and 8.2% (16/195) death rate for this period respectively.
I believe the numbers will be somewhat higher at the end due to the anecdotal comments of NP with possible 9 more deaths back in October, however it is a good and wise suggestion to cover scenarios with lower casualties.
I think you are erudite enough
. Yes, there are some papers published in which it is reported that with the improved SOC deaths (S/C patients) have gone down to the 10% range. We know 23% of all patients died in the first half, and NP mentioned more than 50 by the time he did a CC on 10/20/20 if my memory serves me well. Somebody mentioned 54 but not sure where this info came from.
In any case. Following your suggestion, ran two possible scenarios: 23 and 16 more deaths in the second half of our trial on top of the 45 already reported.
This means only 11.8% (23/195) and 8.2% (16/195) death rate for this period respectively.
I believe the numbers will be somewhat higher at the end due to the anecdotal comments of NP with possible 9 more deaths back in October, however it is a good and wise suggestion to cover scenarios with lower casualties.
(7)
(0)