’Percentage’ of few values [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by qualityassurance – Jordan, 2021-10-21 16:57 (47 d 18:21 ago) – Posting: # 22652
Views: 497

Hello Helmut,

» Since I attended these early conference, I can confirm it… However, speaking of ‘percentages’ of <100 values is unfortunate at least and \(\small{\geq \small{^{2}/_{3}}}\) was meant indeed. 67% is stupid and 66.7% or 66.67% hardly better.
» I one insists in a percentage, it should be written as \(\small{\geq66.6666666666\ldots\%}\) or \(\small{\geq66.\dot{6}\%}\). ;-)

So almost all (Regulatory Assessors) agree that 2/3=66.66666667%=66.67%=67%=Accepted run.;-)


Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,788 posts in 4,557 threads, 1,548 registered users;
online 5 (0 registered, 5 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 10:18 CET (Europe/Vienna)

There is no adequate defense, except stupidity,
against the impact of a new idea.    Percy Williams Bridgman

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz