[memexy]

Yes. That's not my question. Are you saying drug trials don't cover such costs and that this is standard? Because that's the pitch the company is making and it sounds odd

> We put the patient in the driver’s seat before, during, and after a trial. Because it’s not just doctors who help build a healthier future. It’s patients. And it’s time to do right by them.

It sounds like they're saying, "patients are treated very badly and we're here to fix that problem". How bad is it to be in a drug trial currently? Are trial participants really treated with neglect? I don't understand what actual problem they're addressing.

[curryst]

If they did, there's always going to be a debate over whether something was caused by the trial. You get a rash and have to go see a dermatologist, was it a result of the trial or unrelated? Or more seriously, you develop cancer. Was it from the trial, or from an unrelated issue? Other people might show symptoms, but it would still take time you don't have for them to sort out whether other participants have cancer, and whether that's a result of the trial or if they just had a higher than average number of people with risk factors.

[memexy]

So how is this company addressing all those issues?