 |
 |
On Sat, 14 Jan 1995 [log in to unmask] wrote: > Seth: > I don't know what your interpretation/recollection is/was of Mr. Devor's > layman statistics, but I can assure you that all of the numbers I used were > directly from Mr. Devor's posting on this list. I did not rewrite Mr. > Devor's investigative history. sorry, it was your first analysis that seemed odd. your final analysis was what i remembered. > As to the report in "The Lancet" on 105 patients; Those numbers indicate a > 5.7% failure rate Which is only approx 2.1 % better than that shown by Mr. > Devors numbers. Still not good enough -->for me<--. > Regression in 9.2 months is fairly fast. It can happen anywhere from 4 > months to over 2 years. I cannot help but wonder how many more will be added > to the list of 6 over the next two years. Que sera sera! > > VernD as a medical student, those numbers seem really good to me for a medical procedure. what can i say. As more and more reports come in the regression still appears to be minimal. --- Seth L. Ness Ness Gadol Hayah Sham [log in to unmask]