This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
With a Freedom of Information Request, the FDA mandated changes and other protocol changes should be added to this article. In fact, a lot can be added. While the investigators were surely wrong on many accounts (not all of which are in this article), we must not forget that they had decided on an entire ethics committee to monitor the situation and the FDA turned them down stating that there was no real conflict of interest. And, the animal deaths were reported, but the FDA found them to be inconsequential. That would really round it out as it's a bit biased at the moment, laying all blame on the investigators when a little should be on the University and the government oversight (FDA) as well. 165.123.99.215 (talk) 20:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, when referring to the FDA above I actually meant the NIH as well, who evaluated and approved the final protocols (which allowed for up to 70 for ammonia levels). 165.123.99.215 (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
