The one article that’s been published with my name on it was a mere 25 pages. The “addenda” (our raw data which the article analyzed) was over 10G of plain text files, no formatting, no pics… .txt; the date, 1996. For some reason, the publishers decided to make the addenda available only piecemeal and in e-form.
There’s a reason why I stay in Drug Discovery (the very beginning of the drug pipeline): we’re not in the Qualified/Validated part of the industry.
The mega documents and so forth begin once a drug gets past the initial stages.
I would probably end up swinging from a rope if I ever moved to an area with Validated systems.
As it is, there are occasional rumblings about making our systems Validated, and I do whatever is in my power to run the other direction. The nightmares I hear from folks who work in Clinical are sufficient to tell me to move into insurance or banking if our Discovery systems ever fall under the same treatment.
[hijack]A few weeks ago my sister-in-law started talking to me about some conspiracy book full of all kinds of tripe about how the Pharma industry is paying off the FDA for approvals and such. While there may be some shenanigans going on in the darker corners, those in the industry see enough of these massive documents (back in the day of printed docs, one drug submission took a tractor trailer load of paper) to be rightfully upset at such accusations. I calmly changed the subject without bothering to try to explain any of this.[/hijack]