InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 7
Posts 662
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/23/2015

Re: joezapp post# 88

Friday, 11/27/2015 5:16:41 AM

Friday, November 27, 2015 5:16:41 AM

Post# of 772
yes, i actually agree with you there (that, unfortunately, patients were in pretty bad shape as it is). it's important there's a cure and i can see how someone being in a bad sitation is deperate to try anything. i'm not implying it's some sort killing machine, their liver is killing them. but i am implying the device doesn't work and resources would be better directed at creating something that does work, instead of after every failed trail track back, reduce the patient base it is tested on even further and simply try again.
i've worked with statistics myself, i'm sure you have as well. in every dataset if you look hard enough and reduce subsets enough you will always stumble upon one small group that shows some sort of correlation. it's usually chance. normally you decide what you want to prove, research it and check the data if your assumption was correct. looking back at research to see if it proves anything, and only then build your hypothesis, i think it's statistically very dangerous ground. anyway, we'll see over the next months/years i guess.

i also agree on Zack's. You can't take them seriously (nor can you most analysts, but that's a different story). Only reason anyone ever does is they market their "Zacks rank" pretty smart so that every one reads it, and nobody realizes there's no real analyst doing any fundamental analysis there, they're just opportunists trying to get noticed.