One of the reasons I'm bullish on Eli Lilly over Novo Nordisk is that I don't think Novo can hack it against a much more R&D-focused American company run by a shrewd corporate climber.
Novo seems like its leadership is much more naïve.
Eli Lilly's investments just seem to be superior to Novo's, which have mostly been falling through recently.
The best Novo seems capable of doing now is mimicking Eli Lilly's next drug, retatrutide.
If they were smart, they would do some collaborations.
But I am a believer in something like a Great Man theory of business success.
There's lots of evidence for it. For example, when high-earning business owners die, the profits of their businesses drop right away.
Turns out, they were compensated for real value to the business.
Where Eli Lilly invested heavily in production, lowered prices more aggressively than Novo Nordisk, and has aggressively sought out new and improved offerings, Novo has just... languished.
And this is reflected in their stock prices now; I don't doubt it will be more so soon.
Add in that Lilly scams the regulator with shortage declaration-ending tricks and this is clearly an all-American beatdown with all signs pointing to it getting even more extreme. Sorry, Novo.
The severity of COVID vaccine-related myocarditis was far lower than the severity of COVID-related myocarditis, which instead looked like regular viral myocarditis.
You can see this in many cohorts. For example, this was seen in France:
And we knew this based on somewhat larger Scandinavian register-based work as well
Do note, however, that the Scandinavian work had a poor case definition for infection-driven myocarditis compared to other cohorts. As the long-term study linked in the QT shows, they missed most