I have not crunched the numbers, I am assuming
Post# of 153875
(Total Views: 342)
Posted On: 03/10/2021 10:49:44 PM
I have not crunched the numbers,
I am assuming if we ended up with a disproportionate amount of the over 65 critical (those most likely to die) than the mortality numbers are skewed higher for us, and lower for placebo. If we had ended up with 2/3rd of the over 65 critical and placebo had 1/3rd then I imagine numbers would be more reflective of what is actually occurring.
This begs the question, how the hell did we end up with that many over 65? Was it really that bad of luck? Did 1 or two sites account for most of the over 65 that ended up in our group?
Who was responsible for keeping track of this?
I said along time ago all our homework has to be A+ before it is handed to the FDA. The game is stacked against us. BP are the super athletic jocks that don't have to show up to class, can have someone else take their test for them (manipulate end points, results), and graduate with a D (very low results) and get a full ride to a large university (EUA/Approval).
We on the other hand have to study our asses off and be perfect on all homework and test. Then we have to apply for a scholarships which will most likely only pay part of our tuition (another trial/EUA) so we can plan on working while we get out degree (more loans, possible dilution).
This is pretty much what Dr. Been said as well.
I have known for quite some time the FDA is not our friend and it would be extremely difficult to get any type of approval (possible after the highly coveted vaccines were out but definitely no chance before, no way did they want to detract from the number of people lining up for the free jabs of who knows what).
Knowing this I am still long CYDY because the drug is that damn good.
I hope some country values their citizens lives and buys from us soon, the proof is there that we are the best therapeutic available right now... with NO SIDE EFFECTS!!! (do no harm, right?)
I am assuming if we ended up with a disproportionate amount of the over 65 critical (those most likely to die) than the mortality numbers are skewed higher for us, and lower for placebo. If we had ended up with 2/3rd of the over 65 critical and placebo had 1/3rd then I imagine numbers would be more reflective of what is actually occurring.
This begs the question, how the hell did we end up with that many over 65? Was it really that bad of luck? Did 1 or two sites account for most of the over 65 that ended up in our group?
Who was responsible for keeping track of this?
I said along time ago all our homework has to be A+ before it is handed to the FDA. The game is stacked against us. BP are the super athletic jocks that don't have to show up to class, can have someone else take their test for them (manipulate end points, results), and graduate with a D (very low results) and get a full ride to a large university (EUA/Approval).
We on the other hand have to study our asses off and be perfect on all homework and test. Then we have to apply for a scholarships which will most likely only pay part of our tuition (another trial/EUA) so we can plan on working while we get out degree (more loans, possible dilution).
This is pretty much what Dr. Been said as well.
I have known for quite some time the FDA is not our friend and it would be extremely difficult to get any type of approval (possible after the highly coveted vaccines were out but definitely no chance before, no way did they want to detract from the number of people lining up for the free jabs of who knows what).
Knowing this I am still long CYDY because the drug is that damn good.
I hope some country values their citizens lives and buys from us soon, the proof is there that we are the best therapeutic available right now... with NO SIDE EFFECTS!!! (do no harm, right?)
(3)
(0)