InvestorsHub Logo

TheHound

01/03/18 8:32 AM

#211236 RE: scottsmith #211231

lol. that doesn’t surprise us one bit.

those of us who can comprehend the PR received positive secondary endpoints which included onset and duration info as well as an explanation of those results.

After today’s PR we don’t know anything different than after the first OM pr the other week.

DaubersUP

01/03/18 8:59 AM

#211241 RE: scottsmith #211231

Are you kidding? Honestly, by 4 year old nephew who does multiplication and speaks Spanish understands the graph Leo pointed out.

In his words, not mine: so around day 28-30 so many people got SOM in the placebo group. It spiked Uncle.
Wow, and so many taking B did not get SOM. Wow, so the onset of SOM had to wait another 2 full weeks for the fewer patients that got som rinsing with B! So uncle, how could they statistically come up with data to prove the duration of when getting Som if the B patients did not get it until so late?

Exactly son! I said. I’m going to make him pancakes now.

Great data!!!!

noretreat

01/03/18 9:19 AM

#211247 RE: scottsmith #211231

delayed onset is a decent finding, imo