>practically speaking, if you can't see anything in a small n animal study, nobody is gonna want to give you more animals, or god forbid go into humans AaAaaagghahhhrrrghhggghhggghhh
-
-
Replying to @eigenrobot @halvorz
"if you don't see an effect in a massively underpowered experiment in a population quite different from the one where the treatment is intended to be applied we stop experimenting" WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS PARADIGM
3 replies 3 retweets 40 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @halvorz
the cost of trials is responsible and the lack of value of low effect sizes
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @AlexGodofsky @halvorz
but people get approval for drugs that increase life expectancy by a tiny sliver of time while decreasing quality of life dramatically, and even fucking placebos (hi phenylephrine) all the time so clearly lacking an effect is no impediment to approval
4 replies 0 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @AlexGodofsky
they all looked great in animal studies
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
there are of course the drugs we have from before the modern clinical development pathway was established wouldn't be surprised if some look bad in animal models, dunno how much has been done on this (more would be nice!)
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
does he know what a p value means
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.