A letter that was written due to significant public interest.... yeah right. The DSMC (data safety monitoring committee) saw the results after an interim analysis and had three options.... 1) Cancel the trial due to ineffectiveness (wonder why that didn’t happen? Oh yes, after two weeks LL was showing great results over standard of care!!). The DSMC could have modified the trial (wonder why that didn’t happen? That’s a puzzler, you would think after seeing such great results you might want to modify trial to 1 shot a week for 4 weeks instead a shot for the first 2 weeks and NOTHING for the last 2 weeks??? How could that possibly help the DATA!! In the actual trial, the last two weeks saw a huge drop in effectiveness which lead to the trial failure AND a “Dumbass” letter from FDA saying the drug “WITH THE DATA AVAILABLE” did not support the clinical benefit of LL. 3) The DSMC could leave the trial as set up, which is what they did. So the trial without shots on the third and fourth week lead to a huge drop off against SOC and its trial failure. People will say that CYDY set up trial so it was managements fault. So a drug shows 78 % better than standard care for first week and I believe it was 82% better over SOC the second week, and the FDA says nope nothing to see here?? (NOT enough data at this time!!) In fact writes a hit piece about the drug. There is no doubt that the FDA wanted the vaccines and not a therapeutic. Now the question is WHY???? Hmmm maybe the boys at ?BP ?? Just a question...
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
