By Chance, Arrangement, or Cause?
Yes, it has been alleged that the multitude (high percentage) of Alzheimer’s patients in the Australian Phase1/Phase 2 clinical trial with remarkably maintained or restored cognition was merely a result of happenstance; that, somehow, only “high-responders” got picked to participate. They all had propitious genetics or neurological physiologies that responded so favorably to Anavex 2-73 for a continuing duration.
It has also been alleged that most or all of the favorable responses were placebo effects, inasmuch as this was not a blinded study. Each participant, along with doctors, nurses, care givers, and family members, knew that the promising new Alzheimer’s drug Anavex 2-73 was being taken by all. Therefore, there was widespread expectation of good results, the classic placebo effect.
As I can determine there can be only five explanations for the virtually universal occurrences of the posted favorable symptom outcomes:
1. Per chance, selected trial participants actually were all uniquely and universally super responders to Anavex 2-73; not at all representative of larger, more diverse drug-responsive Alzheimer’s populations.
2. The medical professionals, for untoward reasons, deliberately selected trial participants they somehow understood would yield favorable results.
3. The lack of trial blinding (everybody knew they were taking the real drug) and lack of a control arm (taking a sham pill) transparently allowed the placebo effect to so grossly taint reported outcomes.
4. Professionals conducting the trial surreptitiously selected, created, or reported only data they thought useful and favorable. The actual results were not in any way nearly as good as presented or perceived.
5. Anavex 2-73, in mid to mild Alzheimer’s patients, yields remarkable, unprecedented treatment outcomes of great favorability.
Let the reader decide on the matter.
