fragile reversal, page-96

Update re Graph 2. Larry has sent through a corrected version of the graph. Basically Graph 2 was wrong.

This is Larry's email and below that in caps is my description of what the graph did show and what the corrected one shows.


LARRY: Ignore my last email and hold the presses. I had corrected the transposition of the comparisons (NS and p,0.01) which was in the version of the slide originally posted on my copy and was looking at that when I responded. The corrected graph is below. Sorry for the confusion which was entirely my fault.



Larry


The corrected version of graph 2 is below all this:


The first version (in the release) showed:

1. treated v non-treated wildtype was not significant. (THIS IS CORRECT)

2. vehicle wildtype versus vehicle knockout mouse was not significant. (THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS I THOUGHT WAS A PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT MEANS THERE WAS NO DIFF BETWEEN DISEASED AND NORMAL MICE - WHICH WOULD INVALIDATE THE EXPERIMENT. LARRY NOW SAYS THIS WAS INCORRECT AND IT ACTUALLY WAS SIGNIFICANT.

3. treated wildtype versus treated ko was significant. THIS WAS WRONG TOO. LARRY NOW SAYS THIS WAS NOT SIGNIFICANT.