Statistics and protection

rslade — Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:36:43 GMT

Sort of.

When it comes to trials of this kind, you have to look at the details, not just the headlines. This trial does appear to have good design, with randomization and a control group with a placebo. That's good.

The results, as reported so far, are positive. That's good.

For those who took the remdesivir, recovery time was shorter. That's good. But the recovery time was an average of 11 days, versus 15 days for the control group. That's not exactly earth-shaking. Also, we probably need to look at the definition of "recovery," and, particularly, look at long term effects like ongoing respiratory and neurological problems that have been reported in some "recovered" patients.

For those who took the remdesivir, mortality was lower. That's good. But the mortality was still 8% for those on remdesivir versus 11.6% for those on placebo. Again, not a result that you want to rely on when people start thinking "oh, there is a treatment, so I don't have to worry as much about getting infected!"

Re: Statistics and protection

rslade — Sat, 02 May 2020 18:20:41 GMT

And then there's this ...

o/' Don't pay for my remdesivir,
The truth is, it barely cures you ... o/'

topic Statistics and protection in Industry News

Statistics and protection

Re: Statistics and protection