A strong Mitigate read by poster D on Yahoo follows:
The unspoken elephant in the room is MITIGATE. Why this trial is ignored by every single analyst is a mystery. Not only should it show significant mitigation of COVID severity, but at trial end it will also confirm REDUCE-IT cardiovascular benefit, drawing to an end the long lasting mineral oil scam and push full adoption by skeptical agencies.. It might also expand Vascepa's treatment parameters for more heart disease patients, like no TG requirements, and even could reduce the chances of other respiratory disease, like the common cold. Unless you don't believe in the science of JELIS, REDUCE-IT, CHERRY, EVAPORATE and Cardio-Link, MITIGATE is destined to be exceptional. As far as April 3rd passing without a presentation by Kaiser, well, if MITIGATE was successful, there are the critics who'd question everything about the unusual trial design and confuse the message, like Feuerstein, Herper and Nissen pulled off 5 minutes after the 2018 AHA, a stench that remains to this day. A peer review is probably what Kaiser is waiting on, because they know an attack on Vascepa's results will also cast a shadow on their trial design and research acumen. The study is incredibly complex, with the one to ten treatment versus control arm ratio. It's even more daunting when you add in all the different patient CVD types, multiple COVID variants during the trial and different timelines for each patient getting vaccinations and boosters. Fertile territory for the enemies of Vascepa to attack. I strongly believe the trial will show statistical benefit, but even the best, most unassailable data, can be dirtied by the trolls that continue to attack Vascepa. That's why I believe April 3rd was called off, to answer all the FUD before it has any chance to stick.
