SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (23735)5/22/2007 9:55:41 AM
From: Biomaven  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 52153
 
Six of the 48 trials did not report any myocardial infarctions or deaths from cardiovascular causes and therefore were not included in the analysis

Yes, I noticed that as well. And it is indeed the case that the overall percentage of MI's in both groups was the same (in fact slightly higher for the control group) as claimed in IJ's post. Isn't statistics wonderful?

That said, I think there is at least a whiff of smoke here, if not the raging forest fire suggested by the media coverage. ABC News last night was suggesting that this was a major drug disaster that yet again called into question the FDA's competency.

Peter



To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (23735)5/22/2007 2:22:11 PM
From: DewDiligence_on_SI  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 52153
 
He has rock-star envy.

Yes, it’s only a meta-analysis and the p-value doesn’t mean much. But your snipes at Nissen are misguided. Nissen’s analysis has been largely endorsed by a joint statement of the ACC and the ADA.

Perhaps it would more accurate to say that the one with rock-star envy is you.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News