RE:RE:RE:RE:TimeWow this turd really is fear mongering and strawmanning the arguments.
Ok lets spell it out for this turd:
1- Pez never said they control statsitical signifcance, only that the science is so strong that it cant be denied statistically speaking.
2-The key takeaway from that Wallace video “translating h2s into therapies” is that you had very significant COX inhibition (matched by thromboxane suppression) at 75mg comparable to Naproxen, even at DAY 1
3- The WOMAC scale numbers correlates with COX inhibition. WOMAC should follow pharmacokinetics of Otena even at these lower doses. Especially given that the half life is long we expect that comparable suppression of COX enzymes, we would expect that to persist as time goes on even at the lower doses.
Hope you learned something today.
PlaySafe wrote: I agree that that the science needs to be there for the trial to work and we don't know yet if the drug is powerful enough at the lower dosage to work that is why they are re-doing the Phase 2 trial. The other big component and uncertainty in a trial is the human component. The participants are asked to evalute the effectiveness of the drug and if tthere is not a statistical significance from the drug vs the placebo group then game over. So I'm not sure you understand how the Phase 2 trial works and what the risks are. To complicate things further, NSAIDs are typically compared/evaluated on their WOMAC scores so even if the new Phase 2 is successful but the WOMAC scores do not compare with NSAIDs that are currently on the market then this will also impact investor centiment. But stick to the belief that they can control statistical significance.