This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Regarding their January ARCHIVES editorial, Rosenberg et al¹ should take a similar and even stronger stance on government-funded clinical studies. As long as subject anonymity is protected, all study investigators and even the public should have complete and full access to all of the original and processed data from studies funded by the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, or any other governmental agency. The Freedom of Information Act guarantees and protects such rights.

A significant portion of data from large multicenter clinical trials may not always make it into a final group article; controversial data supporting alternate viewpoints that challenge or contradict key conclusions reached by most investigators may go unanalyzed. Researchers who unsuccessfully try to access such data to support unpopular or opposing viewpoints should not have to accept explanations of being outvoted or feel that they are jeopardizing their . . . [Full Text of this Article]