New Emails Released🔥:
Did the TOGETHER Trial Principal Investigator admit to dosing patients with high-dose ivermectin before official ethics approval was secured, and did those patients get removed from the published paper?
Let's dig in with a 🧵
Alexandros Marinos 🏴☠️ on X: "New Emails Released🔥: Did the TOGETHER Trial Principal Investigator admit to dosing patients with high-dose ivermectin before official ethics approval was secured, and did those patients get removed from the published paper? Let's dig in with a 🧵"
Ed Mills, TOGETHER Principal Investigator, Mar 6 '21 on IVM dosing: "We're doing 3 days of dosing [..] That's what's being administered" TOGETHER IVM study, New England Journal of Medicine: "Our study involved patients assigned between Mar 23 '21 - Aug 6 '21" (paraphrased)Independently, I had already concluded that 3-dose placebo (the specific placebo subgroup that was administered to match the high-dose ivermectin arm) had to have started around March 4th 2021: doyourownresearch.substack.com/p/together-tri…Mills' newly released email (which I saw on Pierre Kory's substack) was written around that time, and in it he claims that 3-day dosing was already being given to patients on March 6th, noting the fact that this was despite clinicaltrials.gov not being updated.However the Appendix of the published paper in NEJM has it in black and white: "No patients included in this analysis were recruited prior to this date"(March 21). What patients was Mills referring to on March 6? He clearly says the low-dose arm had been changed already.What motive would they have to obscure patients recruited before March 23? The appendix states that the local ethics approval came on March 21. The actual document from the regulator is dated March 15. Whichever of those we believe, March 6 is before that. static1.squarespace.com/static/6112a25…That sounds like quite a serious allegation. Except, this isn't the first time we've seen exactly this pattern. The fluvoxamine study also seems to have deleted a patient recruited before the ethics approval arrived.Replying to @alexandrosMWait - was there an extra patient recruited between Jan 15 and Jan 20th? We don't have to wonder. If we go back to the August 6 slides, it's right there. 3 patients recruited to fluvoxamine treatment on the week starting January 18th. One must have been before the 20th.To add insult to injury, in his email Mills clearly says that the dose was changed based on Andrew Hills' meta-analysis. This makes sense and the dates fit. Yet the paper talks about "advocacy groups". Those groups have never been clearly specified. Which is it?This thread describes another reason for a full investigation into what happened with the TOGETHER trial. The fact that my analysis is out there for over a month with no real answer is stunning. The fact that the "fraud busting data detectives" are saying nothing is shocking.If this is the first you hear about irregularities with the TOGETHER trial, start here:The first post about the leaked emails from insiders of the TOGETHER Trial is up on substack: TOGETHER Leaks, part 1: Were more patients deleted?
