Replies to post #92262 on Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[Robert C Jonson]

Thanks for re-instating iwfal's post. Now I hope somebody can blow a hole in his reasoning.

:-)

[mojojojo]

Robert,

Thanks for posting that. I did see that I got a reply that was deleted.

It could be that I implied something that wasn't intended. The point I wanted to make was that running a trial designed to detect a hazard ratio for death of say 0.75 will be more desirable than having to run a trial designed to detect a hazard ratio for death of say 0.55.

I think that should clear up any issue that may have been questioned.

All IMO,

mojo

[Thurly]

I similarly asked CJ to reinstate iwfal's post earlier this morning.

Iwfal's one of the best biostatistics people you will find on any message board. He may have a point of view, but don't confuse that with his integrity regarding the rigours of biostatistics. In this area, as far as I've seen (and I've followed him since 2005) he is nearly, if not entirely flawless.

I remember a debate that raged back in the DNDN days. Walldiver, another poster who was almost never wrong regarding biostatistical issues was going after it with another poster. Iwfal weighed in. Someone scoffed and counter argued. Walldiver wrote back something to the effect, "Good luck" and "This is going to be good...!" It was.

Iwfal has always been generous with his knowledge. You can ask a question and he will answer it. That said, it's not any easier to understand much of what he says than it is to understand biostatistics in the first place!

Just saying, keep an open mind. He's a terrific resource for the board.