Introduction
Directive 2001 versus proposed new Regulation: throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
Deregulation under the guise of “simplification”
Dangerous change to the definition of a clinical trial “Low-intervention clinical trials”: caution is needed
“Substantial modification”: wiggle room for scientific misconduct
Member States’ subsidiarity on ethics at risk of being seriously undermined
‘Disappearance’ of ethics committees
A single assessment for all Member States concerned, with very few possibilities to “opt-out” Untenable timelines and “tacit authorisation” by default
Make-believe “ethics assessments” by Member States (Part II): more or less limited to informed consent, and restricted to “own territory”
A revision offering major opportunities to improve healthcare
Requiring comparative clinical trials against the ‘best current proven intervention’ Improving citizens’ access to information
Reporting of adverse drug reactions: do not let ‘the fox guard the henhouse’
To conclude: several major improvements are needed
Downloand full report
Attachment: en_clinicaltrials_analysis_final.pdf