In 2003, only 21 new drugs were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, a marked drop from the peak of 53 seen in 1996. In fact, most of the drug majors failed to obtain US approval for a single new product last year, or managed to get clearance for only one, notes the WSJ.

Modern technology is delivering millions of chemicals for testing, but has so far done little to overcome the problem of identifying those compounds that are 'druggable,' i.e. those that have the qualities (such as small molecular weight and water solubility) that mark them as promising drug targets.

Over-reliance on technology has bypassed the human ability to druggability, says Robert Lipper, vice President of piopharmaceutics R&Dfor the Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute, and this is causing a "major drag on the development time line."

And further evidence that investments in this area have yet to pay off comes from a recent study by the National Cancer Institute, which suggested that, of 350 cancer drugs now in human trials, only one was the product of combinatorial chemistry.

Those opposed to modern drug discovery methods such as high-throughput screening are concerned that they eliminate the chance for serendipity, and leave no room for intuition or intellectual creativity.