ISR [Bioanalytics]

posted by The Outlaw Torn – Europe, 2012-12-18 09:09 (4545 d 20:43 ago) – Posting: # 9728
Views: 8,360

Thank you, Ohlbe. I appreciate the feedback.

It's nice to see the EMA weigh in on this issue, however, their decisions always seem to come down to the same tired "appropriate justification," which everyone always provides, or at least tries to provide, whenever their is a discrepancy in their study with official guidelines. This type of position, IMO, allows too much leeway for interpretation, both for the applicant and the assessors; both in a good and bad direction. At the end of the day, no one really knows what is appropriate until one submits and finds out, which, in a roundabout way, appears to bring us all the way back to the status quo. Oh well, at least they didn't say it couldn't be justified.

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,678 registered users;
121 visitors (0 registered, 121 guests [including 12 identified bots]).
Forum time: 06:52 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

If you want to get people to believe
something really, really stupid,
just stick a number on it.    Charles Seife

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5