Practical Neurology

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Practical Neurology 2007;7:210-211; doi:10.1136/jnnp.2007.124396
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Read responses to this article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Talbot, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Talbot, K.

Editorial

The study of rare diseases: butterfly collecting or an entrée to understanding common conditions?

Kevin Talbot

Senior Clinical Research Fellow and Honorary Consultant Neurologist, University of Oxford, Department of Clinical Neurology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK; kevin.talbot@clneuro.ox.ac.uk

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The said truth is that it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong.

Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832)

The "greatest happiness principle" propounded by 19th century Utilitarian philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart-Mill directs that "right" actions are those which do the greatest good for the greatest number. Even if this philosophical principle has fallen into disrepute, having found its purest expression in the totalitarian excesses of fascism and communism, utilitarianism seems like a promising moral foundation, at least for public health medicine. However, medical research tends to be driven by the intellectual interests of individual researchers and rare diseases appear more often on grant applications than can be justified simply by the number of people affected. A commonly stated defence is that by understanding the pathophysiology of rare diseases we will learn something of importance about more common conditions. Are . . . [Full text of this article]




eLetters:

Read all eLetters

Entrée to understanding common conditions?
JOHN M.S. PEARCE
Practical Neurology Online, 18 Jul 2007 [Full text]



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.