Everyone always blames NP. However, isn't it the j
Post# of 148179
No monitoring to make sure a balanced distribution of not only age, but also between severe and critical.
Should have been written into the protocol.
Frankly, I do not believe this is a case of the CRO advising NP and CytoDyn that this is what we recommend to be written in here, and NP/CytoDyn saying no age and S/C distribution do not matter, so don't put it in.
CRO malpractice?
And, who the **** is advising NP to not file a formal EUA application, not merely here, but M2M previously, is that the CRO, too?
If so, that's strange, because you would think they want the money from the work. Or, is there more money in stringing this thing along like this?