No. In my view, the challenge is neither to increase it nor to slow it down. It is neither more nor less innovation that we need, but rather better innovation. Assessing technologies provides us with arguments that help us understand what it means to have better technology in terms of efficiency, safety and costs, but that is not enough.
To determine what better innovation is, we have to simply understand what is known as the burden of disease in epidemiological terms. We must determine whether our efforts make a difference in places where a real burden of disease exists, instead of having incremental innovations, as described by our colleague, that enable us to create another innovation without focusing on the crucial problems to which we have no solution right now.