the people here spending an absurd amount of energy poo-pooing what pphm executives have been saying for the record recently need to give it a rest.
the rose-colored glasses crowd has been following pphm for 10+ years, and has decent reason to believe it may be a bit different this time. half of skeptics here are largely admittedly uninformed on the details of the science, yet feel they know enough to doubt the progress numerous pros are commenting on in the scientific and financial communities.
you are making assumptions that the trial design is weak, the baselines are different from each other, it's statistically insignificant, there's no HR, PPHM is hiding the truth, blah blah blah.
you're assuming PPHM is intentionally misleading the public and accusing them of being fraudulent.
is it because the results are too good to be true if they're not lying/misrepresenting? is it because you guys haven't personally reviewed the results and you're smarter than the people who are??
why don't you all just shut up and admit we'll all see soon enough?
if they get a partnership deal in the fairly near term after what will surely be exhaustive due diligence on the research details, what will be your basis for assuming there isn't any validity then?
AI
