
It's an important legal protection for drug makers : 0%
It's bad public policy : 0%
Yes : 11%
No : 88%
Accelerate the field of personalized medicine : 27%
Provide important safeguards in a brave, new world : 27%
Make the lawyers happy : 0%
All of the above : 45%
Yum, yum, get me some : 14%
I'll eat anything with ketchup : 7%
I only eat meat that's walked : 57%
In vitro or in vivo, I'm a vegetarian : 21%
An overdue protection : 38%
Harmful to industry : 15%
Election year politicking : 46%
The FDA will be too cautious in determining the risks, and slow the technology : 71%
The FDA will be too aggressive in advancing the technology without adequate safeguards : 14%
The FDA will hit a proper balance between safety concerns and patient benefits. : 14%
Yes : 21%
No : 78%
Yes, innovation will play a critical role in cutting healthcare spending : 87%
No, there's no relation between investment in research and healthcare costs : 12%
Assisted suicide should be legalized : 83%
Assisted suicide should be illegal, but passive euthanasia allowed : 8%
Risk of abuse would be too great to allow : 8%
Life is too sacred to allow : 0%
As big as they say : 72%
A problem, but no long-term damage : 27%
No threat at all : 0%
The federal government should encourage and fund such research. : 100%
The federal government should maintain current policies. : 0%
Dude, I forgot the last option. : 0%
Safety : 22%
Speed : 11%
Funding : 22%
Management : 44%
Stem cells : 25%
RNAi : 8%
Nanotechnology : 25%
Combination devices : 0%
Biofuels : 41%
1 year : 15%
3 years : 46%
5 years : 23%
10 years : 7%
It will never happen : 7%
Garnier is right that journalists need to be more sophisticated when they report scientific news? : 28%
reporters exacerbated the problems with Avandia? : 14%
he should worry less about the media and more about R&D? : 42%
all of the above? : 14%
Hillary Clinton : 20%
Barack Obama : 26%
John McCain : 20%
Mitt Romney : 33%
Iraq : 11%
Healthcare : 0%
The economy, stupid : 88%
Yes : 58%
No : 16%
I'm a vegetarian : 25%
Weak research and development : 28%
Tough regulatory environment : 28%
High cost of drug development : 28%
It is difficult to find safe and effective compounds not already approved : 14%
Fewer IPOs, and less money raised. : 22%
Fewer IPOs, but more money raised. : 44%
More IPOs, but less money raised. : 11%
More IPOs, and more money raised. : 22%
Pharmaceutical : 5%
Biotech : 33%
Medical Devices : 22%
Diagnostics : 38%
Patent reform : 22%
Follow-on / generic biologics : 22%
post-market surveillance : 44%
Comparative effectiveness : 11%
acquisitions and licensing deals : 30%
medical breakthroughs : 0%
restructurings : 10%
safety concerns : 60%
Yes : 77%
No : 22%
End : 15%
Shift to federal research spending on regenerative medicine : 25%
Continue because embryonic stem cell research will still need to proceed : 60%
Begin a diet and exercise plan : 61%
Take that trip around the world you always wanted to take : 0%
Do nothing because what will be, will be : 16%
Buy new running shoes and wear them while watching sports on TV : 22%
The public views them as the same industry : 55%
The public draws distinctions between the two : 44%
Yes : 25%
No : 25%
No, but it should be : 50%
Buy : 14%
Sell : 28%
Hold : 57%
Tax fattening foods. : 11%
Charge overweight people more for health insurance. : 16%
Do more to educate people about health and nutrition. : 50%
Encourage restaurants to provide healthier choices. : 5%
Let people eat what they want to eat. : 16%
Iraq : 58%
Healthcare Reform : 23%
The economy : 11%
Other : 5%
Hillary Clinton : 42%
John Edwards : 0%
Rudolph Giuliani : 14%
Barack Obama : 7%
Mitt Romney : 7%
Fred Thompson : 28%
Science : 15%
Investment : 0%
Business models : 15%
Reimbursement : 46%
Regulation : 23%
Yes : 71%
No : 0%
It will make no difference : 28%