I'm sorry, that's a terrible story. I am not a fan of Prasad. I find him querulous and condescending, but the main reason is that I have seen him give talks, r

I'm sorry, that's a terrible story. I am not a fan of Prasad. I find him querulous and condescending, but the main reason is that I have seen him give talks, rant on his podcast and tweet about clinical trials in a way that is designed for maximum volume, sacrificing nuance and accuracy. He also has zero tolerance for challenges to his views (that he would write such an article in the OP is another sign of this). As I said, this gives the appearance of being a useful activity, but in my opinion has zero material impact on medical care or policy. He is not merely a skeptic, since skeptics do not need to write articles describing why they are not only important, but somehow more important than people actually doing research. A good example of someone that retains healthy skepticism, writes about it in the literature, advocates for patients but still actually does research and tries to improve the way clinical trials are done is Ian Tannock [1]. [1] https://dailynews.ascopubs.org/do/10.1200/ADN.19.190328/full/ https://dailynews.ascopubs.org/do/10.1200/ADN.19.190328/full...