I find it annoying.
Landmark is a relative term, as it denotes something that denotes a prominent and critical event.
It may well be for the company concerned, but of course it is up to the recipient to decide relative importance to them.
Once we become surrounded by landmarks, it is difficult to distinguish between them.
The term has no legal meaning.
One issue is that it avoids a superlative term, and exempts a company from a run in with the prescription medicines code of practice committee.
Dr Martin Goldman
Senior Medical Advisor, Forest Laboratories, Europe.
www.forestlabs.com
tel 01322 429355
fax 01322 555469
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Wilson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 10:58 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Landmark studies
Dear List
Is anyone else finding this phrase increasingly irritating?
What defines a "Landmark" study?
Who defines a "Landmark" study?
Does a drug company need authorisation from any recognised body before
describing a study in this way?
--
Peter
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.611 / Virus Database: 391 - Release Date: 03/03/2004
|