Navigating the world of medical innovations is a complex process. Anyone involved in such a process finds themselves caught in a delicate balancing act between regulation, technology, and pressure for financial results. With the urgent need for new treatments in various medical fields, the ultimate goal is simple: to make people feel better.

Every year, scientists, researchers, and medical professionals work tirelessly to bring new treatments, procedures, and devices into the public sphere. These medical innovations stem from a fundamental human need—I want to feel better. The desire to improve lives and alleviate suffering is powerful. It fuels countless hours of research, development, and clinical trials.

However, the process of bringing a medical innovation to life is far from simple. It involves copious amounts of paperwork, financial investment, and medical testing to ensure safety and efficacy. In this scenario, two outcomes can emerge—you either get the green light or your innovation dies in the pipeline.

According to Nature, the pressure for results can sometimes lead to flawed data. John Carlisle accessed anonymized Individual Participant Data (IPD) from more than 150 trials and found that 44% of these trials contained at least some flawed data: impossible statistics, incorrect calculations, or duplicated numbers or figures. These shocking findings underscore the investigative checks and balances necessary to ensure reliable, trustworthy trials and protect public health.

The question that arises, then, is: who will save us in this clashing world of medical advancements and regulation?

The stark reality is Deus Ex Machina—the divine machine saving the day in the last moment—is not coming. There is no external savior in this scenario. Rather, the responsibility falls on each stakeholder involved in medical innovations—regulators, researchers, doctors, and even the patients themselves.

Greater emphasis must be placed on robust scrutiny during the trial stages. Regulations should be consistently updated to accommodate new advancements in technology. And above all, transparency and honesty should be the cornerstones of every medical innovation process.

In this intricate labyrinth, constant vigilance is our guiding light. However, beyond vigilance, a clear vision and setting specific goals can provide a solution. For instance, a country like Cyprus could set transparent and specific medical innovation targets for 2024: 2 new drugs against Alzheimer's and 3 In-Vitro Diagnostic (IVD) devices.

Establishing defined milestones does not merely provide a goal for innovators to strive for; it aligns bureaucracy and funding efforts towards a common aim and signifies a collective commitment towards advancement. Thus, not only would bureaucracy be compelled to facilitate, rather than impede innovators, but funding parties would also be motivated to support the most promising projects.

It's through this collective effort that we can continue working towards our shared goal: effective innovations that make people feel better, and in the process, save lives. The medical innovation community must function as one cohesive team, setting clear benchmarks, aligning our efforts, and working towards them, to truly make headway in fulfilling our shared mission and achieving the vision we all strive for.