Thread Rating:

billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 12492
Thanks for this post from:
OnceDearSOOPOO
May 26th, 2020 at 11:53:57 AM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

It looks like the UK government are trying to spin the drug, remdesivir, to the public, possibly as a distraction from a certain recent UK political controversy.

In spite of a conclusion that "Early data suggests it can cut recovery time by about four days, but there is no evidence yet that it will save more lives., it is being described thus...

"UK Health Secretary, Matt Hancock said it was probably the biggest step forward in the treatment of coronavirus since the crisis began."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52805828



What would you say is a bigger step forward? This drug has shown it is effective against the virus. It is a step forward. No one is claiming it will defeat the virus, just that its a step in the direction. As Alfred Hitchcock says- Its not the end of the end, nor even the beginning of the end, but it could be the end of the beginning.
Now they know what works, all they need to do is find how to make it better. HIV wasn't beat by a single drug, they needed a cocktail of them. Now we have one ingredient and we can look for the rest.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
unJon
unJon
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 3146
Thanks for this post from:
OnceDear
May 26th, 2020 at 12:16:11 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Quote: OnceDear

It looks like the UK government are trying to spin the drug, remdesivir, to the public, possibly as a distraction from a certain recent UK political controversy.

In spite of a conclusion that "Early data suggests it can cut recovery time by about four days, but there is no evidence yet that it will save more lives., it is being described thus...

"UK Health Secretary, Matt Hancock said it was probably the biggest step forward in the treatment of coronavirus since the crisis began."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52805828



What would you say is a bigger step forward? This drug has shown it is effective against the virus. It is a step forward. No one is claiming it will defeat the virus, just that its a step in the direction. As Alfred Hitchcock says- Its not the end of the end, nor even the beginning of the end, but it could be the end of the beginning.
Now they know what works, all they need to do is find how to make it better. HIV wasn't beat by a single drug, they needed a cocktail of them. Now we have one ingredient and we can look for the rest.



Well put.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 266
  • Posts: 9091
Thanks for this post from:
OnceDear
May 26th, 2020 at 12:22:17 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Quote: OnceDear

It looks like the UK government are trying to spin the drug, remdesivir, to the public, possibly as a distraction from a certain recent UK political controversy.

In spite of a conclusion that "Early data suggests it can cut recovery time by about four days, but there is no evidence yet that it will save more lives., it is being described thus...

"UK Health Secretary, Matt Hancock said it was probably the biggest step forward in the treatment of coronavirus since the crisis began."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52805828



What would you say is a bigger step forward? This drug has shown it is effective against the virus. It is a step forward. No one is claiming it will defeat the virus, just that its a step in the direction. As Alfred Hitchcock says- Its not the end of the end, nor even the beginning of the end, but it could be the end of the beginning.
Now they know what works, all they need to do is find how to make it better. HIV wasn't beat by a single drug, they needed a cocktail of them. Now we have one ingredient and we can look for the rest.



It actually has very little efficacy

They did a lot of cherry picking so the study looked better.

For example they changed the end criteria Midway thru the study so that instead of fatalities it really concentrated on time to recovery only.

They also didn't move further with the second arm of the trials and ended up giving the placebo patients the drug as well which means any issue with the drug after the first arm of the trial has been ruined
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 173
  • Posts: 10462
Thanks for this post from:
OnceDear
May 26th, 2020 at 12:31:26 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz


For example they changed the end criteria Midway thru the study so that instead of fatalities it really concentrated on time to recovery only.



Not really a big deal. Sure they may hope the drug has a certain positive action, but if it doesn't, focusing on what it did do is fine.
The Hall of Unverified Claims is a vast place with many shelves.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 113
  • Posts: 8467
May 26th, 2020 at 12:41:43 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

Quote: billryan

Quote: OnceDear

It looks like the UK government are trying to spin the drug, remdesivir, to the public, possibly as a distraction from a certain recent UK political controversy.

In spite of a conclusion that "Early data suggests it can cut recovery time by about four days, but there is no evidence yet that it will save more lives., it is being described thus...

"UK Health Secretary, Matt Hancock said it was probably the biggest step forward in the treatment of coronavirus since the crisis began."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52805828



What would you say is a bigger step forward? This drug has shown it is effective against the virus. It is a step forward. No one is claiming it will defeat the virus, just that its a step in the direction. As Alfred Hitchcock says- Its not the end of the end, nor even the beginning of the end, but it could be the end of the beginning.
Now they know what works, all they need to do is find how to make it better. HIV wasn't beat by a single drug, they needed a cocktail of them. Now we have one ingredient and we can look for the rest.



It actually has very little efficacy

They did a lot of cherry picking so the study looked better.

For example they changed the end criteria Midway thru the study so that instead of fatalities it really concentrated on time to recovery only.

They also didn't move further with the second arm of the trials and ended up giving the placebo patients the drug as well which means any issue with the drug after the first arm of the trial has been ruined



Dark, although I'm not an expert on medical research, I have been involved in it, once as a paid lead investigator. The study shows it IS effective at decreasing time to recovery, AND lowering death rate. Since the study was low powered (not a lot of patients), the results did not meet the 95% confidence interval, but it was unlikely to do so. Remember, death fro COVID-19 is RARE. In the USA it will end up being less than 1% of people infected will die. So in a study with 1000 random COVID-19 + patients, only 10 or so would die. If in the remdesivir group 7 died, that would in no way reach statistical significance, but would lead you to believe it LIKELY is helpful.
I can only tell you that the docs that design these studies REALLY want them to go to a full conclusion, and breaking off the study to give even the placebo group the drug leads me to believe that they felt it was UNETHICAL to withhold the drug from ANY of the patients.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 266
  • Posts: 9091
June 2nd, 2020 at 12:24:09 PM permalink
It's now been six business days since the full trial data for Remdesvir came out.

It's been digested for what it is.

So how hopeful is a drug with this news?

For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
unJon
unJon
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 3146
June 2nd, 2020 at 12:35:19 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

It's now been six business days since the full trial data for Remdesvir came out.

It's been digested for what it is.

So how hopeful is a drug with this news?



You are conflating issues. There’s a discussion topic about whether this drug is good news to people with COVID. There’s a separate discussion about whether this drug is good news for equity owners based on expectations around sales built into the market.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 266
  • Posts: 9091
June 2nd, 2020 at 12:49:38 PM permalink
Quote: unJon

Quote: darkoz

It's now been six business days since the full trial data for Remdesvir came out.

It's been digested for what it is.

So how hopeful is a drug with this news?



You are conflating issues. There’s a discussion topic about whether this drug is good news to people with COVID. There’s a separate discussion about whether this drug is good news for equity owners based on expectations around sales built into the market.



I'm not the only one who is "conflating" the two.

Perhaps you trust Barron's more (as you should)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.barrons.com/amp/articles/gilead-science-stock-drops-on-latest-data-for-coronavirus-drug-51591018107
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
unJon
unJon
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 3146
June 2nd, 2020 at 12:55:29 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

Quote: unJon

Quote: darkoz

It's now been six business days since the full trial data for Remdesvir came out.

It's been digested for what it is.

So how hopeful is a drug with this news?



You are conflating issues. There’s a discussion topic about whether this drug is good news to people with COVID. There’s a separate discussion about whether this drug is good news for equity owners based on expectations around sales built into the market.



I'm not the only one who is "conflating" the two.

Perhaps you trust Barron's more (as you should)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.barrons.com/amp/articles/gilead-science-stock-drops-on-latest-data-for-coronavirus-drug-51591018107



I read the Barron’s article and don’t see them conflate the issue. In fact I think they were quite clear on the distinction about what moves the stock price and how that differs from what the study means about whether it is a good drug for Covid victims.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 266
  • Posts: 9091
June 2nd, 2020 at 1:15:42 PM permalink
Quote: unJon

Quote: darkoz

Quote: unJon

Quote: darkoz

It's now been six business days since the full trial data for Remdesvir came out.

It's been digested for what it is.

So how hopeful is a drug with this news?



You are conflating issues. There’s a discussion topic about whether this drug is good news to people with COVID. There’s a separate discussion about whether this drug is good news for equity owners based on expectations around sales built into the market.



I'm not the only one who is "conflating" the two.

Perhaps you trust Barron's more (as you should)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.barrons.com/amp/articles/gilead-science-stock-drops-on-latest-data-for-coronavirus-drug-51591018107



I read the Barron’s article and don’t see them conflate the issue. In fact I think they were quite clear on the distinction about what moves the stock price and how that differs from what the study means about whether it is a good drug for Covid victims.



Well I am new to both stocks and drug business so I will defer
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee

  • Jump to: