“…apparently the modern standard for granting Emergency Use Authorization for medical countermeasure products is “hope”, although I am unable to find that as a condition for granting EUA in the current regulatory guidance documents. Perhaps that criteria will be added in upcoming revisions to the congressional authorization language.” I …
“…apparently the modern standard for granting Emergency Use Authorization for medical countermeasure products is “hope”, although I am unable to find that as a condition for granting EUA in the current regulatory guidance documents. Perhaps that criteria will be added in upcoming revisions to the congressional authorization language.” I really love it when you speak sarcasm Dr Robert💜 Now we need to ask the Equator Network to send out a survey to the folks who spent decades developing evidence standards for trial design and reporting IF and HOW sponsor “hope” fits in to the endpoint data collection and summaries since by definition hope is a preceding condition variable (unless you measure hope fulfilled) AND looked at in another light, hope is a biasing and confounding feature which the entire design of controlled trials is enacted to eliminate. Just saying… And, after that survey, let’s ask all the medical schools and residency EBM teachers to help us locate hope in their new curricula for witch doctors (not to cast any aspersions on those honest practitioners of folk medicine who have merit within a consistent philosophical framework). This seems like a problem of integrity and congruity on the part of traditional allopathic medicine though. Just saying…
“…apparently the modern standard for granting Emergency Use Authorization for medical countermeasure products is “hope”, although I am unable to find that as a condition for granting EUA in the current regulatory guidance documents. Perhaps that criteria will be added in upcoming revisions to the congressional authorization language.” I really love it when you speak sarcasm Dr Robert💜 Now we need to ask the Equator Network to send out a survey to the folks who spent decades developing evidence standards for trial design and reporting IF and HOW sponsor “hope” fits in to the endpoint data collection and summaries since by definition hope is a preceding condition variable (unless you measure hope fulfilled) AND looked at in another light, hope is a biasing and confounding feature which the entire design of controlled trials is enacted to eliminate. Just saying… And, after that survey, let’s ask all the medical schools and residency EBM teachers to help us locate hope in their new curricula for witch doctors (not to cast any aspersions on those honest practitioners of folk medicine who have merit within a consistent philosophical framework). This seems like a problem of integrity and congruity on the part of traditional allopathic medicine though. Just saying…