My e-mail to Pierre, cc Jan Salut Pierre,
After the 1PM conf call, I was kind of pi**ed off the answers provided by you and Janelle. I have a lost in the 6 digits ($) so I went for a walk around the Olympic Stadium (the Maisonneuve Park in Montreal).
I processed (in my head) the following example to understand what went wrong for T1 Ph3. Could you please tell me where I am wrong :
A 8th grade teacher decides to do an experiment with his students (aka: kids).
Teacher : “ Please find 10 dads (parents in the class) who weights over 500 pounds (500 pounds to 1500 pounds) and replace daily 500gr of meat by 500gr of gummy bears (no specific reason for gummy bears) and weighed them at 1.2 weeks and 2.6 week to see if gummy bears help with weight loss”.
Kids : “Great that will be funny and interesting”.
Since they feel sorry for the overweight dads, teacher and kids decides to put the 10 dads on Weight Watchers as soon as they accepted (randomization).
At the beginning of the study (week : 0), 4 of the 10 dads (101 on 242 for T1) where already under 500 pounds went they started the gummy bear trial. Neither kids or teacher noticed the fact that over 40% of the dads where out of scope of at the beginning of the experiment.
The results are at weeks 1.2 and 2.6, (… ) results didn’t make any sense. Teacher and kids are still convinced that Weight Watchers didn’t have any impact. Even 6 months after the experiment they were still trying to convince the school principal and class parents…
Could you tell if I am wrong ?
For me, the main differences is 12 years and near 100,000,000$ in R&D was waisted. Do you take some responsibilities for this mess ?
Kind regards,
F.