Noticed recevied @ 1.15pm., page-58

Na. Don't buy it Southoz.
Sometimes people can fall into the trap of over-interpreting, which you have done. Assumptions lose strength exponentially when they are piggy backed on the back of each other.
My logic was simply pertaining to mortality rates based purely on what I read in the announcement.
Again, there are signs of decreased mortality. It was reported. Logic suggests that if you compile a list of reasons as to why this is so, the test group is at the top. Doesn't mean it is the reason, but it is most likely, until further notice.


From the annual report released in April 2012. Consistency of reporting of decreased mortality is a good sign in my opinion.

The serious adverse events (SAEs) reported among study subjects have been typical for critically injured patients and the mortality rate is substantially below that reported in comparable trials.