banter and General Discussion, page-4016

@DocMcstuffins

A specialist at obfuscation, wherever deemed necessary, by we.

My response is read my first sentence then read my last. So I can be slightly convinced you might, here they are

For me it is a balance of probabilities.
For me it is not an appeal to authority, it is information from authorities that carries weight.

As others have responded, there was always going to be another trial.

On another point, your first, do you honestly believe the FDA would respond with a question requiring post hoc analysis of data they too have if they had no idea? It seems weird to me if they did not already have maybe just an inkling of the answer if not the same output. Don't they have staff to examine all data supplied, to look for incorrect statistical treatment or analysis? Just maybe from time to time the FDA might find something interesting to them, of possible value, to the extent they might ask respondents if they want (to spend more time and money) to follow it through, see what happens, via a leading question.