Possible irrationality in biomedical research: small-N human studies get derided as “too small, preliminary” even if the effect is clear and consistent enough to have a low p-value; animal studies often use tiny numbers of animals or don’t even list the number.
-
-
Low standards for what counts as “good enough data to pursue further” (so you can be sure your favorite candidate will clear it) but overly high standards for how large a clinical trial has to be (so smaller competitors can’t afford to run them.)
Show this thread -
I don’t know enough about life inside a top pharma company to actually claim anybody thinks this way, of course. It’s a product of a cynical imagination.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.