"John H." <johnh at faraway.xxx> wrote in message
news:UCUea.235$zU5.7108 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
||http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7390/618|| BMJ 2003;326:618 ( 22 March )
|| News roundup
|| Lawyers may seek judicial review of panel reviewing paroxetine
| Abergavenny Roger Dobson
|||| Lawyers acting for more than 4000 people who allege side effects
from the
| antidepressant drug paroxetine (Seroxat) may seek a judicial review
over the
| composition of a review panel set up to look at the drug and other
selective
| serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).
|| The lawyers say they are unhappy that some of the committee members
have
| links with the drugs industry. It has been claimed that some
members of the
| review team, which is drawn from the Committee on Safety of
Medicines, have
| shares in GlaxoSmithKline, the maker of paroxetine (Guardian 17
March: 1).
|| ...
[John, it's OK if you're 'angry' with me for using your post in my
'hard' way. Please Forgive me, if possible. kpc]
John's post provides an example of the Coward's 'way' by-committee
[institutionalized Coward's 'way'].
It's obvious that such constitutes 'moving toward' 'self' and 'moving
away from' doing the work in acertaining Truth - 'blindly'-automated
"volitional diminishing-returns decision" via 'blindly'-automated TD
E/I-minimization [AoK, Ap7].
ken
