Nowhere in there does it say it was “post hoc”, you’re the liar. I was very careful in my post to acknowledge there was change during the trial, however, there are traditionalists and then there is where all of the science is moving, and it is not the rigidity advocated by a doctor who advocates a treatment validated by a trial with problems and issues that this one does not have.
Going back and redoing the trial is simply not how it is done these days and there are plenty of doctors these days who receive so much benefit in terms of research and income from rival treatments, that they will write just about anything to sabotage a new treatment that won’t replace their income streams or will invalidate their research. As I recall, that critique was written by people advocating in their practice, Optune, which failed in its initial trial, was recast using a flawed trial for devices, not for drugs, much less rigorous, and now there are doctors participating in this 21,000 per month for life income stream from all of their patients worried that that might go away.
It probably won’t go away, but it will not be the only choice of patients and not their most desperate, but ultimately frustrating and family finance destroying choice.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
