Stockchat, what the 'mother' believes is not relevant to whether...

Stockchat, what the 'mother' believes is not relevant to whether the post is likely to be a real one. The issue is that this person states quite specifically that a health professional told her that her child received the drug and also suggested a higher dose would be better. That's the bit that makes me think its nonsense.

Fine that a trial participant would have high hopes and may want to let others know about (this is common to all trials, regardless of whether the drug turns out to be effective), but the health professional doesn't (and can't) know because the trial is double blinded, and secondly, can you really imagine a health professional in that setting guessing about what a different (untested) dose would do?

Its rubbish and demonstrably so because what this person said simply can't be true because no health professional connected with the trial is aware of which patients are really getting the drug or what effect a higher dose would have.

More worryingly, the sort of fevered response from investors to an anonymous facebook post (spare me) will encourage unscrupulous speculators to put similar things up on line.