Raf. I know it’s frustrating but at end of day the judge missed this not Covington (IMO). It’s not even a close point. The judge just didn’t get it on every scientific point made including Kurabayashi which we have discussed at length on this bored.
Mori if it’s read by anyone clearly shows a POSA would prefer DHA over EPA effects. There’s not even a hint that someone reading that study would then use EPA alone. Hikma lawyers spoon fed her excerpts and she copy pasted many of them into her brief and failed to adequately give amrn a fair trial. I think this case was way over her head.
Read Mori. Or take a look at the conclusion of it below that I pasted. It’s ridiculous how we lost this case but I don’t think it was Covington. Luckily all the major issues were raised at trial and we can post a strong appeal. As another poster said , no one realized what she was thinking until her decision came out and it was too late. With the appeal, we will be able to listen to oral arguments and decide early if the judges get it or not (which is great). I’ll be there.
“Despite an increase in LDL cholesterol after DHA supplementation, LDL particle size increased—a finding that may be favorable. Furthermore, EPA but not DHA increased fasting glucose concentrations.
These findings may help clarify which of the n-3 fatty acids is responsible for the protective mechanisms of dietary n-3 fats on cardiovascular disease. They suggest that, despite an increase in LDL cholesterol after DHA supplementation, the increased LDL particle size may represent a shift to less atherogenic particles, in which case the parallel increase in HDL2 cholesterol and decrease in triacylglycerol may represent a more favorable lipid profile than that seen after EPA supplementation.”
