Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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: Biomaven who wrote (33386)	1/16/2010 2:42:00 AM
From: A.J. Mullen	1 Recommendation Respond to of 52153

Thanks for the link Peter. You always seem able to find pertinent links! The criticism ignored what I thought was the most salient point. the important point is that the original data are not sufficient. That seems clear to me. The whole thrust of the French paper was that the data were insufficient. Sample sizes should have been bigger. They could have been big enough to power the tests reasonably without overwhelming the experiments. It would not have cost a fortune. The data were insufficient. Anytime data are insufficient, analysis can be criticized on the grounds that the data are being pushed too far. But that's all the data they had. These are Monsanto's data! They are too few to suggest the products are safe. Cherry-picking? Most definitely a possibility. That's what I was alluding to when I talked about selection after analysis. Ashley Ps. I hope this makes sense. I did not drive home tonight for a reason. Should I be in charge of a keyboard?