> Every year, an untold number of potential new drugs or interventions, any one of which might go on to improve thousands of lives, are thrown away without being tested in humans. It is a matter of funding, not science: there is not enough money in the public or private sector to run clinical trials on every exciting proposal that comes out of research labs.
Thinkable.org is a recently-launched crowdfunding platform for cutting-edge scientific research: http://thinkable.org/discover
Similar to the article's Dating Agency model, Thinkable does review the campaigns before listing them publicly: "Dr McNeil said Thinkable would only allowed researchers affiliated with accredited research organisations to use the site and any funds donated would be managed by the organisation to ensure they were used for research." [1]
Thinkable doesn't appear to allow you to buy early spots in the clinical trial queue, but it certainly seems that they want to ensure that important science research won't be lost between the cracks due to a lack of funding. A more democratic approach to funding scientific research, in contrast to the plutocratic approach discussed in the article.
[1] http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/young-scientists-u...
Edit: I temporarily removed my point about Thinkable being a democratic approach, because in retrospect it seemed a trivial & obvious observation, until I saw that wyager had just replied to that point specifically!