hector31: Understand where you're coming from and agree that is...

hector31:

Understand where you're coming from and agree that is one possible interpretation, and of course until we're unblinded we won't know.

I also realise it's dangerous to read anns as Holy Writ and pore over possible meanings and interpretations.

But.

"The blinded data from the trial to date demonstrate that NNZ-2566 is safe and well tolerated and that the mortality rate to date is lower than expected".

To me the structure of this sentence is saying "this is one big lump of good news". If the lowered rate of mortality meant the study would be harder to interpret (in other words if it's implicitly a bad thing) then there would be a "however" or a "but" in there somewhere. The rest of the paragraph discusses the biomarkers, and my interpretation- given that of course the company is putting a positive spin on things- is this:

1) Less people are dying than you'd expect. Maybe it's because of the 2566.
2) If it is because of the 2566, we're hoping that the biomarkers will back us up so we can go to the FDA and say "approve us you bastards".

So while I agree that your scenario is a real risk, I don't believe that's what the company is trying to tell us.

At least we can be reasonably sure that (a) the corpses aren't exploding David Cronenberg style and (b) NNZ-2566 won't be responsible for the zombie apocalypse.