[disgruntledphd2]

So, I went and followed the link (helpfully it goes to the correct table, though you'll need to scroll down a bit).

https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download#page=18

This is the first point where 300 odd people were excluded from the analysis because of protocol deviations. Worryingly, this number was much higher in the treatment group. While I hope that blinding would have prevented any motivated exclusion, it's still quite concerning.

His second main point (which is actually really interesting), is that there were 3500 cases of symptoms consistent with Covid-19 that weren't revealed by a PCR test. I'm not sure what to think of this (and note that this number swamps the actual numbers of confirmed cases by about 10x), except that it matches with anecdotal evidence I've seen around negative tests in the presence of symptoms.

The details of the second point can be found here: https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download#page=42

As a meta-point, the world would be a better place if more people clicked on linked and attempted to interrogate the soruces of things.

[selimthegrim]

I was referring to his second main point.

[disgruntledphd2]

I only see one comment giving out about it, and it reveals an absolutely touching faith in peer-review practices.