Posted by used2b on April 3, 2005, at 18:26:07
In reply to That's it! » used2b, posted by gardenergirl on April 3, 2005, at 17:33:12
> It's the somewhat legalese tone to your language, since language is what you wish to discuss. That's what's triggering my association about your name. It reminds me of a former poster who came and went rather quickly, and who also mistakenly assumed that this and the other board are overseen by IRB's.
>
> gg
Are you offering a legal opinion of the obligations of those who operate on-line message boards?If you know more about it than I represented in my suggestion to Larry that clinicians operating experimental programs often have reporting requirements, perhaps you could advise Larry of your opinion on what might or might not be his best recourse. In my posting, however, I offered a caviat that I am not prepared to present a legal conclusion beyond suggesting there are avenues for recourse. I really don't understand why you are paying that much attention to my posts.
For my part, I was offering the best support I could based on what came to mind for me at that moment. I passed a test to qualify to post here in which I recognized advise might not be accurate. Perhaps you, as I do, feel triggered to make contributions of uncertain accuracy based on momentary subjective impressions of what you read in a particular discussion.
And again, just on my part, I wasn't necessarily polling this site as to what opinions people hold on the legal status of what might or might not be considered research by pioneers in a new technology. I advised Larry, and any readers who might vicariously identify with him, based on what I might do, that if a clinical provider offends me, complaining to the offending clinician is seldom the last available venue.
poster:used2b
thread:479358
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050323/msgs/479404.html