Unbelievable oversight and miscalculation by EXP Trader
The 60 deaths cited during Epogen use in the previous SA article were NOT from 260,000 patients, they were from 260,000 estimated patients PER YEAR FOR THE PAST 8.5 YEARS. This is unbelievable to me that SA keeps publishing these #$%$ articles both pumping and bashing this stock. They are both full of speculation and are equally misleading. I am long AFFY, but I am not sure which of these 2 articles is worse. Saying things like it was human error or that Takeda doesn't want to bring the drug back are both terribly misleading statements. Why not just write an article that reports what is actually known- like Takeda is conducting an investigation and will we will not know until it is complete what the outcome will be or that the deaths occurred during the month of February, 2013 which would support the idea that the 3 deaths could be related and leave it at that. I am used to reading articles by Adam F. who always has an opinion but is at least not reckless in his statements like these articles are.
"The 60 deaths cited during Epogen use in the previous SA article were NOT from 260,000 patients, they were from 260,000 estimated patients PER YEAR FOR THE PAST 8.5 YEARS."
If you're gonna even attempt to go that way, how many of those patients have been on the drug for 1 year? For 2 years? For 3 years? For more? Kind of common sense that you'd have to eliminate from subsequent years numbers all those who survived their first few months regimens and continued on the drug for all those years. So, you can bet it's far, far, far from 260,000 per year for the past 8.5 years. Just think; 1 patient who's been on the drug since inception. You gonna want to count that patient as 8.5 and say there were 8.5 patients involved when there was only 1?
Let's get real if we're gonna attempt to get real over this. It's how many different patients were on the drug over the past 8.5 years, and how many of those died because of epogen. Without knowing for sure, my gut tells me the ones who died did so relatively early in their treatment regimen. So, if one guy died in the first month of treatment should i multiply him by 12, getting 12 deaths for that 1, to get a full year's figure?
I think you are confused.
Here is what exptrader said:
" ...though it is yet not settled whether the cause was the drug or human error, though statistically it points to human error as the MOST LIKELY possibility. "
In contrast AlphaExposure is making a claim that Takeda doesn't want to bring the drug back based on an unsubstantiated conversation that for all we know happened with his pet monkey.
Big difference between the two.