White starts out with stating that "not many clinicians or scientists would argue with the campaign by AllTrials to register and report the full methods and results of clinical trials". Yet his own actions with the PACE Trial strongly indicate that he is one of those clinicians or scientists who would argue with the AllTrials campaign! He has been painfully slow in reporting the full methods and results of his own infamous trial and resists all attempts at releasing requested data, including that which was promised in the original registered protocol. White then argues that full public disclosure of trial data is bad because the "anonymised" data is not adequately anonymous. I am not sure to what extent the BMJ are proposing that all data should be released, but somehow I doubt that the people behind AllTrials are insensitive to issues relating to patient confidentiality. Precisely, and then there is this: I am reminded of this recent editorial by Tracey Brown hosted on thecochranelibrary.com (April 2013): White is still being part of the problem, I doubt he will be contributing much to the solution. Another point to consider: All efforts at attaining additional information about how the PACE Trial was conducted has been fiercely resisted, especially the minutes to the meeting about why they changed the protocol etc. Perhaps there would be little or no need to request such information if they actually published the statistical analysis plan? This statistical analysis plan was supposedly finalized before the analysis was started. The trial ended in January 2010 and the Lancet paper was submitted for fast track publication around January 2011. So it probably has existed for about 3 years but has still not seen the light of day, despite promises made 28 months ago (and IIRC several months ago too when it was stated that something was being prepared for publication or possibly even in the peer-review phase?). Unless of course, it is what a recent blog opined was a "work in progress": What is the point of PACE publishing a protocol when much of it was changed anyway. Similarly, why did they even bother registering at http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN54285094 ? I wonder how many FOI requests in total? FWIW, knowing that the results of a trial would be publicly available with adequate anonymity, would indeed encourage me and probably many others to participate in it.