Who is ProfB4; a new member of the team?
Did you even look at the first slide?MD is dead. Long live the new king!
Slides 20 made me laugh,it shows what a waste of time EAE research is.
I disagree but the is good and weak science everywhere it does highlight that some people need to speak to someone that knows about statistics. There may be a difference if the experiment was repeated
Slide 3 is a shocker to me:MS invariably progresses 75% people with ambulatory problems at 25 years from onsetHow can this be when all one reads here is about how great allof these DMT's are..?
This information is pretty the effective DMT era.If you are talking to an audience that thinks EAE is a bad disease you need to put it in a context of MS being a bad disease, as part of the justification of having a severe animal model.
Not pretty effective but pre- effective DMT eraPredictive text problemWe don't have 25 year data for the highly effective DMTNatalizumab was born in 2OO6 so we have another fifteen years to get an answer another five for the interferons which in my mind are not highly effective for most people.
Thanks for these, MD. What are you saying in slide 36?
Recommendations should be based on verifiable scientific observation rather than thinking aloud at a meeting?
Please note that all comments are moderated and any personal or marketing-related submissions will not be shown.