>Yes, worthless. As in no one should put any weight on such unconfirmable "evidence". It's just wasted effort by the investigators, who piddled away their time

>Yes, worthless. As in no one should put any weight on such unconfirmable "evidence". It's just wasted effort by the investigators, who piddled away their time (and their funding agency's money) because they're not willing to release the data. And UK regulators definately do not. If they dont have sufficient data to be confident in the decision they make collecting more a requirement of reimbursement. Here is an example of the guidelines https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg20/chapter/reviewing-research-evidence https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg20/chapter/reviewing-rese... Taking only a single trial is worthless. Or rather about as useful as taking a murder suspects mothers testimony. Evidence based medicine is simply not broken by not handing out complex, expensive and commercially valuable data to everyone who would like a copy. Any more than the court system is not broken by keeping certain evidence from a jury. >Your judgement that such uninformed comments are intentional lies is probably untrue in most cases. Oh they definately are. Just look at the recent data on covid vaccines published by public health wales to see how bad that situation currently is.