Independent

[flipper44]

OK, after a day of debating this with AIs, I still feel I’m right about “OS Events (deaths) language, but apparently the scientific world doesn’t like any logical clarity. So my apologies, nevertheless, it is still likely, even in AI’s eyes, with all the other givens I’ve talked about, that whether the interim was at 85 events or 114 events the trial is still in trouble. However, from everything else I looked at since previously posting on this topic, a 114 event interim on said date would have meant futility five months ago, so interim was likely 85 events, and given every other nuance, it still doesn’t get Survaxm 2b over 16 months, imo.

What I did learn is that the DSMB can meet monthly if they want to (reviewing safety/futility), and in this case the strange repeat PRs, articles about the old interim, the MimiVax announcement/emphasis of ongoing review by dsmb, the July 16 still waiting for curves to separate, plus the mid August 18th due date at midnight still overhanging makes me think they are struggling and possibly meeting monthly.