It is long past time we started to use technology that has been proven and is widely available, to document with more clarity, transparency, and credibility what happens in clinical trials and in experiments and studies of all kinds.
Seeing an audible, visual record of what has been done in a scientific experiment can be more useful than words and numbers on a page. Even if ultra-reliability of the recording medium is needed, memory is still cheap and getting cheaper.
Why shouldn’t there be digital video and audio records of, for instance, radiology images, used to diagnose or treat CCSVI, or MS? This form of record-keeping would not significantly alter the cost of studies, experiments or trials, in 2013, and in all likelihood, in the future. It would provide invaluable documentation, to present-day and future physicians, researchers, peer reviewers of publications, students of new procedures, ethics boards, lawmakers, or anyone viewing it. It could also be used as part of a published document itself. It might be hard to dispute.
Rather than being mired in standardization, though, it would be a good thing if the experimenters themselves created, and used, “Best Practices” documents, to guide and instruct others. The best and most practical route, to acceptance of a new practice, is often to set a good example, which puts to rest most reasonable demands and questions. Don’t leave the scientific method to YouTube.
"Try - Just A Little Bit Harder" - Janis Joplin
CCSVI procedure Albany Aug 2010
'MS' is over - if you want it
Patients sans/without patience