InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 75
Posts 4687
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 09/06/2003

Re: rafunrafun post# 115677

Saturday, 10/07/2017 1:38:29 PM

Saturday, October 07, 2017 1:38:29 PM

Post# of 426436

Bleeding data is indisputable.

"no evidence of increased risk of bleeding with use of n-3 LC-PUFAs was observed."



Not how trials work. Meta analyses are notoriously unreliable - in large part because it is a post hoc cherry picking of datasets.Only slightly more reliable than epidemiological data, and that is very unreliable with anything other than extreme HRs.

I'll say again, most of this board is making multiple mistakes (although they are hardly unique to this board; they are essentially universal among single stock boards):

1) cherry picking which data applies by finding reasons to exclude data you don't like and include data you do (confirmation bias)

2) thinking of things as black/white - when all 'facts' in developing science HAVE TO BE thought about probabilistically.

3) ignoring the baserate of failure in biotech. Most drugs with novel (i.e. class of drug not been through ph3 trials before, or the 'class' is messy (biologics are often of this form).

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AMRN News