This appears to all be accurate. By design, such a trial is designed, set up, and monitored in such a way as to assure that no "investigator bias" is possible. I'd add one one more to your list, however. Even the patient doesn't know what he is receiving.
As to your prior post (OPINION) about who might know and who couldn't know and when they could or couldn't know and exactly what couldn't be known, I'll note a few things-
1)all you said was correct, in view of official trial/government recognition. Any such "official" recognition would only occur at EITHER the end of the study OR if for "some reason" the trial was stopped earlier.
2)I was not referring to possible "official" trial or government recognition. That would occur when stated. I was referring to the possible decision by SOMEONE who might not agree with your opinion of what, when, where, and why "something" might be known. Who could such a SOMEONE be? Think about it and figure it out for yourself.
3)The desired level of "blinding" would be impacted severely (not "officially" as the trial protocols have not changed but via common sense) IF Remdesivir is more and more viewed by SOME PEOPLE (probably very important who they might be) as basically ineffective or even very poorly effective. All of a sudden, the possibility of the SOC causing some portion of any seen improvement factor MIGHT seem much less likely to SOME people. I'm more interested in what THEIR opinion MIGHT BE than in what your written opinion is.
crashco is correct in that "officially" we almost certainly have to wait for "official" trial end to see "official" analyzed results. An early stoppage for some unusual occurence would seem to be the only possible exception to that and such is probably very unlikely at this point (though not impossible as everything about Covid has been "unusual"
. However, SOME PEOPLE who might not be "officially" involved in the active trial ANALYSIS but who might have an overriding INTEREST in what is happening (you figure out for yourself who such PEOPLE might be and WHAT FORM such interest might take) and who might be in a position to view even the blinded progression of the trial could possibly be influenced by any existing or increasing view that Remdesivir may be poorly effective or even ineffective on the patients in the trial. IF such persons (assuming they exist) held such a view about Remdesivir, ANY RESULT in the trial MIGHT be attributed to SOMETHING OTHER THAN Remdesivir. Nothing "official" about this and I'm not saying it is happening or will happen, just common sense observation about what MIGHT happen because there MIGHT BE very interested PEOPLE watching what is happening. BECAUSE such PEOPLE wouldn't be involved in the official analysis, they wouldn't have to answer to anyone for anything that doesn't impact the trial directly. They could make THEIR DECISIONS regarding Brilicidin and/or IPIX based on their speculation. And this is just my speculation.
I bought more today.
As to your prior post (OPINION) about who might know and who couldn't know and when they could or couldn't know and exactly what couldn't be known, I'll note a few things-
1)all you said was correct, in view of official trial/government recognition. Any such "official" recognition would only occur at EITHER the end of the study OR if for "some reason" the trial was stopped earlier.
2)I was not referring to possible "official" trial or government recognition. That would occur when stated. I was referring to the possible decision by SOMEONE who might not agree with your opinion of what, when, where, and why "something" might be known. Who could such a SOMEONE be? Think about it and figure it out for yourself.
3)The desired level of "blinding" would be impacted severely (not "officially" as the trial protocols have not changed but via common sense) IF Remdesivir is more and more viewed by SOME PEOPLE (probably very important who they might be) as basically ineffective or even very poorly effective. All of a sudden, the possibility of the SOC causing some portion of any seen improvement factor MIGHT seem much less likely to SOME people. I'm more interested in what THEIR opinion MIGHT BE than in what your written opinion is.
crashco is correct in that "officially" we almost certainly have to wait for "official" trial end to see "official" analyzed results. An early stoppage for some unusual occurence would seem to be the only possible exception to that and such is probably very unlikely at this point (though not impossible as everything about Covid has been "unusual"
. However, SOME PEOPLE who might not be "officially" involved in the active trial ANALYSIS but who might have an overriding INTEREST in what is happening (you figure out for yourself who such PEOPLE might be and WHAT FORM such interest might take) and who might be in a position to view even the blinded progression of the trial could possibly be influenced by any existing or increasing view that Remdesivir may be poorly effective or even ineffective on the patients in the trial. IF such persons (assuming they exist) held such a view about Remdesivir, ANY RESULT in the trial MIGHT be attributed to SOMETHING OTHER THAN Remdesivir. Nothing "official" about this and I'm not saying it is happening or will happen, just common sense observation about what MIGHT happen because there MIGHT BE very interested PEOPLE watching what is happening. BECAUSE such PEOPLE wouldn't be involved in the official analysis, they wouldn't have to answer to anyone for anything that doesn't impact the trial directly. They could make THEIR DECISIONS regarding Brilicidin and/or IPIX based on their speculation. And this is just my speculation. I bought more today.
