 |
 |
Brian Collins wrote: > > The conclusion of a 5 year Double-blind placebo controlled experiment > has resulted in a tentative conclusion that two plus two equals FOUR. > Surely any neurologist worth his salt could ,after about two minutes > of concentrated thought, make a confident and accurate prediction of > the result of this study. > It is obvious that the Ropinerol people are going to work their way > through the age ranges , and the whole Parkinson's Circus ( Patients > included) Are going to congratulate them on a splendid piece of work. > I think it is a TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY. Non-professional readers of medical journal articles, like you and me, need to sort out which are important and which are not. Government oversight organizations such as the U.S. FDA need a uniform approval protocol that includes a series of increasingly stringent (or risky) trials, beginning with tolerability and safety vs. dosage; first in mice or other cheap animals, then perhaps monkeys, and then human subjects. These are followed by other trials to verify efficacy of all proposed formulations and dosages, etc. This rigorous gauntlet of trials is supposed to protect both the maker and the approval agency against some possible future disaster (e.g., thalidomide). So, many of the journal articles we see represent trials done just to put on record that certain standards have been met, and not what we consider "research". Cheers, Joe -- J. R. Bruman (818) 789-3694 3527 Cody Road Sherman Oaks, CA 91403-5013