So just curious why it is so important to have randomized patient selection with controls. Let’s say they picked a cohort that would favor the results. There may be some efficacy here but in what kind of patient population? One that would hold up under randomized clinical trials? We shall see eventually.
The argument was appropriately powered RANDOMIZED clinical trials vs a small non randomized safety study with efficacy as a secondary endpoint. So depending on how they picked and who they picked these results could be meaningful or meaningless.
Open studies are fraught with bias and that’s why we need the next set of trials.
It takes but a rookie scientist to make the distinction between what we have so far and what we need in the future to confirm or refute anything.
I am Not saying there is nothing here. Just saying they haven’t proved anything yet
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
