Confirming Paradigm

In 1997/ Sheiner (34) proposed the formal use of the learning vs confirming paradigm for clinical dmg development. Learning trials address an essentially infinite set of quantitative questions concerning the functional relationship between prognostic variables/ 

---

All of the above should ultimately result in applying the Teaming and confirming paradigm as laid out by Lewis Sheiner as the basis of drug development, where in the early phases of drug development (Phases I and Ha) the focus lies on learning... 

If one follows the conventional optimization paradigm, adopting point-wise solution formats, the best feasible answer, x, which minimizes fix), is X = (200 17.9), as can be confirmed by examining the contour plots of / shown in Fig. 5a. 

The conceptual model uses the Source -Pathway - Receptor Paradigm. The paradigm requires that each of the parameters within the model are documented, estimated, measured or recorded. The model identifies the source of any contamination identifies who or what is affected (the receptor) and identifies how the source may reach the receptor (pathway). The collection of field data, observations and estimates confirms whether a linkage exists between the source and receptor. 

The distinction between electrophilic and electron-transfer mechanisms of addition reactions to vinyl double bonds of ArX—CH=CH2 (X = S, O, Se) has been achieved by studying substituent effects. Specifically, the effects of meta and para substituents on the rates of electrophilic additions correlated with Hammett radical cations correlates with statistical tests. The ofclcctrophilicj/o-1 (FT) dichotomy is in accord with the conventional paradigm for cr/cr+ correlations and further support has been found by ah initio calculations. Interestingly, the application of this criterion to the reactions of aryl vinyl sulfides and ethers with tetracyanoethylene indicates that cyclobutanes are formed via direct electrophilic addition to the electron-rich alkene rather than via an electron-transfer mechanism.12... 

As a result of Prof. Faurisson s activities as described in chapter 3., forensic research on Auschwitz boomed since 1988. Each time a researcher came to a conclusion contradicting the widely held views, he was socially ostracized and persecuted, like Prof. Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, and Germar Rudolf, but when the results confirmed the reigning paradigms, the researchers were darlings of the media and politicians, like Jean-Claude Pressac, the researchers from the Jan-Sehn-Institute in Cracow, and more recently Prof. Robert van Pelt.69... 

---