Editorials in 2008

The recent proposal from the European Commission (EC) for a new directive on the protection of animals used in research is well intentioned, but some of its ramifications could cause it to backfire.

The global economy is in trouble. Investment in biomedical research should be a key ingredient in any recovery plan.

Elections may be won on national issues, but the domestic concerns of a superpower have global ramifications, and the science policy of the next US administration will be no exception.

Dual-use research—research that could be misused to pose a threat to public safety—needs to be regulated, but the best way to do so is not straightforward at all.

Critics of experimentation in nonhuman primates have used a variety of arguments to defend their views. Yet some of those arguments can be used to advocate the use of these animals in biomedical research.

Some analysts believe that the economic hegemony of the US is on its last legs, but the same does not seem to be true of its scientific supremacy.

With the future of HIV vaccines unclear, the pursuit of alternate strategies to curb the spread of AIDS is welcome.

Embryonic stem cell therapy may soon enter clinical trials. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will need to provide clear guidance on how it will regulate such trials and ensure that politics will not cloud the regulatory process.

In this issue of the journal, we introduce some changes to underscore our long-standing interest in translational research.

The use of ghostwriters to pen scientific papers is nothing new, but if we want to get rid of them, stricter authorship rules may not be sufficient for a successful exorcism.

Science funding in the United States is tight, and the application process is arduous. A recent study of NIH peer-review recommends a major overhaul of the system. Will the changes prove cosmetic or curative?

An Institute of Medicine report recommends that the United States government create a program to provide consistent guidelines for clinical interventions. The reliability of the guidelines will depend on the availability of the clinical data to be assessed.

What's the difference between real and perceived conflicts of interests?

The Innovative Medicines Initiative is an ambitious plan to accelerate the development of new drugs in the European Union. But however worthy, its implementation might prove challenging.

A new proposal might allow drug makers to promote off-label uses of their products by distributing medical publications to US doctors. Stronger rules could assure that information—not propaganda—drives doctors' prescription practices.