chas1232123 -- I have no problem at all with that line. Aside from possible patent enfringement issues, I'm as curious as the next person regarding the outcome of the STRENGTH trial, which is testing just how bad DHA supplementation is for you at the same time as testing half the REDUCE-IT dose of EPA.
But of course that editorial did more than argue that the result of STRENGTH matters. It cast shade on the results, and couched faux skepticism in the backhanded positive words of "promise" and "hope".
There's no promise here. There's no hope. Those words are reserved for potentiality. Vascepa doesn't have "potential". It's FOR REAL.
"Should doctors use Vascepa? “They should use it,” Kastelein wrote via email. “The only thing we are waiting for is to learn whether Vascepa is unique or other fish-oil preparations or other doses of EPA have less, similar or better efficacy.”
That is a strange reply---why wait for anything? While waiting, simply use Vascepa as best available. If "something better" should come along, then switch.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
