RE: FDA (b)anality

Subject: RE: FDA (b)anality
From: "Dan Goldstein" <DGoldstein -at- riveraintech -dot- com>
To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:27:44 -0500

If you really thought the official wording could place the patient in
jeopardy, you would contact FDA and explain your reasoning to them. In
the unlikely event that you were right, they would tell you to use the
wording that your users understand best. But they wouldn't tell you to
use two inconsistent notices as a solution; no good technical editor
would.


-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Goble
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 2:07 PM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: FDA (b)anality

Would it be acceptable to include the official notice in a
less-prominent place, then in a more prominent place include a notice
which would actually be meaningful to the reader?

I haven't yet worked on FDA-regulated medical devices, so I'm curious.
It probably isn't critical in this case, but I can imagine circumstances
where using only the official wording could in fact place the user or
patient in jeopardy.




This message contains confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing, copying, electronic storing or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us, by replying to the sender, and delete the original message immediately thereafter. Thank you.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days.
http://www.doctohelp.com

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


References:
FDA (b)anality: From: Chris Morton
Re: FDA (b)anality: From: Milan Davidović
Re: FDA (b)anality: From: Paul Goble

Previous by Author: RE: future tense vs. present tense
Next by Author: Cheeky FnR
Previous by Thread: Re: FDA (b)anality
Next by Thread: Re: FDA (b)anality


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads