ABSTRACTED FROM A COMMENTARY. author was un named

"...Why aren't the most relevant questions being asked? Who is currently setting the questions? Who should be? Who shall direct this prioritisation? Patients are best able to identify the health topics most relevant to them to inform their comfort, care, and quality of life, as well as its quantity. The patients are the David, who must load their slings against the Goliaths of the pharmaceutical companies who need evidence to market goods and make profits, and trialists who are driven by curiosity, the need to secure research money, professional acclaim, and career development. Profit, scientific inquiry, grant money, and research papers are acceptable only if the central motivation is the good of patients...".



http://www.thelancet.com/journals/la...893-7/fulltext

I don't know who the author is, but I tip my hat to their response! "For the good of the patient" should always be the central reason for any data collection or whatever.

Thanks!
Peg

We are deeply appreciative of the Lancet, which gave us a say in the journal and support during the GDNF trials. [clinical and court]

paula