I didn't say there was no positive test. I suggested that a better test, one with fewer false positives, should be used the next time this anti-viral is tried. Sometimes an individual clinician will become overly-enthusiastic about his discovery and will not use the rigorous controls that are needed to evaluate the therapy. I do hope it works but you can't let down your scientific skepticism.
” I suggested that a better test, one with fewer false positives, should be used the next time this anti-viral is tried. “
The test for ebola is fraught with false negatives, not false positives.
If you look at the structure for this particular drug you will see a very similar structural moiety that’s also present in the favipiravir that’s arrested ebola in lab studies.
What ‘rigorous controls’ would you suggest with patients who have an 80+% mortality rate should they be placed in a ‘control’ group?
Maybe if we wait 6 months or so to set up a proper experiment we could ‘properly’ test this and other experimental drugs. Course, there’ll be a half a million dead by then. But at least we’ll have a properly controlled experiment.
If your loved one was infected with ebola would you stamp your foot and insist on only treatments that had been tested with ‘proper controls’?