Dont twist my words. I know what I said and I know what I meant.
"......mirror as best they can the patient subset in JELIS that showed a 53% RRR in CVE's. R-IT has been designed and tweaked to give the best possible chance for the JELIS subset trial results to be replicated in a western population."
My statement above is NOT the same as "mirror" so that the patient subset is exactly the same.
Any changes Amarin made to the patient subset selection will have been done for very good reason.
Are you suggesting that your understanding of LDL-C and your knowledge of biochemistry and clinical trials is better than the scientists who designed the R-IT trial, principally Declan Doogan, former head of R&D at Pfizer no less?
Have you ever worked for a major pharmaceutical company?
I am a science graduate and have previously worked for Takeda and a generic sub-division of Merck.
I have read a large number of your posts on this forum and I aint impressed. You have demonstrated that you have an extremely poor understanding about the true role of LDL-C that is consistent with that of someone who has had no scientific training or background whatsoever. You simply cherry pick the data that fuels the mind game that you are playing.
Having been involved with statins from the offset you are attached and obsessed with them to the point where your mind will never be able to assimilate all the available evidence, accept the facts and truth, and just let them go. Cognitive dissonance its called.
R-IT will be an overwhelming success the same way ANCHOR was. You can mark my words and take that statement to the bank.