common English mistakes in pharma
12 Common English Mistakes in Pharma—and How to Fix Them
Most English mistakes in pharma are not embarrassing grammar slips. The costly mistakes are sentences that hide the owner, blur the level of certainty, confuse a process with its result, or leave a colleague unsure what to do next. This guide focuses on twelve patterns that matter at work—and gives you practical replacements you can use immediately.
- Calibrate claims to the evidence
- Write actions with clear ownership
- Spot twelve high-impact language patterns
Visual model
Turn a vague sentence into an actionable one
A useful pharma message usually connects evidence to meaning and then names the next action.
1 · Evidence
What do we know?
Name the observation, source, or status without adding a conclusion too early.
2 · Meaning
Why does it matter?
Explain the impact or uncertainty at the level the evidence supports.
3 · Action
What happens next?
State the owner, action, and timing whenever they are known.
Mistake 1: using a stronger claim than the evidence supports
Words such as “prove,” “safe,” “effective,” “compliant,” and “no risk” carry a heavy meaning. In everyday conversation, people often use them loosely. In pharma, the reader may interpret them as a firm conclusion supported by a defined review. If the analysis is preliminary, your language should make that status visible.
Match the verb to the evidence. “The data show” is appropriate for a directly observed result. “The data suggest” signals an interpretation that may still change. “We have not identified” describes the limits of the review more accurately than “there is no.” This is not weak English; it is calibrated English.
- Risky: “The data prove there is no safety concern.”
- Better: “The available data have not identified a new safety signal; monitoring is ongoing.”
- Ask yourself: what evidence would I need before this sentence could be read as final?
Mistake 2: hiding the actor with passive language
Passive voice is useful when the process or result matters more than the person: “Samples were stored at 2–8°C.” It becomes a problem when the team needs ownership: “The document will be updated.” Who will update it? When? Has the owner agreed?
Use active voice for commitments, decisions, and follow-up. “Regulatory Operations will update the document by 14 June” is easier to track than “The document will be updated.” You do not need to remove every passive sentence. Use it deliberately instead of automatically.
- Process focus: “The samples were analyzed using the validated method.”
- Ownership focus: “The analytical team will investigate the outlier.”
- Before sending an action, underline the owner and deadline. If you cannot, the sentence may still be incomplete.
Mistake 3: confusing “actual,” “current,” and “eventual”
Several English words look familiar in other languages but do not carry the expected meaning. “Actual” means real or factual; it does not normally mean current. “Currently” means now. “Eventual” means happening at the end of a process, not possible or occasional.
These differences can change a timeline or status update. “The actual version” may be understood as the genuine version, while you intended “the current version.” Build a personal list of words that look familiar but repeatedly cause confusion in your language pair.
- Use “the current approved version” for the version in force now.
- Use “the actual result” only when contrasting the real result with an estimate or expectation.
- Use “a potential delay” for something that may happen; “an eventual delay” suggests it will happen later.
Mistake 4: translating word partnerships literally
Correct vocabulary can still sound unclear when the words do not naturally work together. English speakers “conduct an investigation,” “raise a concern,” “meet a requirement,” “mitigate a risk,” and “make a decision.” Literal combinations such as “do an investigation” or “take a decision” may be understood, but they slow the reader and can sound less precise.
Learn the verb and noun as one unit. When you save “deviation” in your notes, also save “report a deviation,” “investigate a deviation,” and “close a deviation.” This reduces the number of choices you need to make under pressure.
- Evidence: collect, review, evaluate, document
- Risk: identify, assess, mitigate, monitor
- Approval: request, obtain, grant, withdraw
Mistake 5: using one long sentence for several decisions
A long sentence can contain correct grammar and still be difficult to use. This often happens when a writer translates the structure of a first-language sentence, adds several qualifications, and places the main request at the end. Busy readers then miss the action.
Separate context, finding, impact, and request. Keep related details together, but give each logical step enough space. Bullets help when you have multiple owners or deadlines; they are not a substitute for a clear opening sentence.
- Before: “Following the review that was completed last week and considering the comments received from the different functions, which are still being evaluated, we would like to ask if it may be possible to receive your final input.”
- After: “We completed the cross-functional review last week. Two comments are still being assessed. Please send your final input by 16:00 CET on Wednesday.”
Mistake 6: making requests so polite that they disappear
Many international professionals add apologies, conditional phrases, and indirect language because they want to sound respectful. The result can be a request that looks optional: “If it would perhaps be possible, we would appreciate if you could maybe review…”
Politeness comes from a professional tone, reasonable context, and respect for the reader—not from making the action invisible. “Could you review sections 2 and 3 by Thursday?” is both polite and clear. Add the reason when it helps the reader prioritize the work.
- Clear request: “Could you confirm the approved wording by Thursday?”
- Useful reason: “We need the confirmation before the document freeze on Friday.”
- Avoid apologizing for a normal request unless you have created a genuine inconvenience.
Mistakes 7–9: unclear references, shifting terms, and missing units
Words such as “it,” “this,” “that,” and “they” are efficient only when the reference is obvious. “This was reviewed and it was accepted” may leave the reader asking whether “this” means the protocol, the change, or the rationale. Repeat the key noun when ambiguity is possible.
Use one term consistently for one concept. If a document moves between “issue,” “observation,” “finding,” and “deviation,” readers may assume those words represent different categories. The same discipline applies to numbers: include the unit, population, time point, and comparator needed to interpret a value.
- Ambiguous: “It was accepted after they reviewed it.”
- Clearer: “Quality accepted the revised rationale after reviewing the supporting data.”
- Incomplete: “The value increased to 12.” Complete: “The mean value increased from 8 mg/L at baseline to 12 mg/L at Week 4.”
Mistakes 10–12: false precision, unexplained abbreviations, and no next step
Exact-looking language is not always precise. A sentence may include many decimals and technical nouns but still omit the source, scope, or relevance. Precision means giving the reader the detail needed for the decision—not every detail available.
Define abbreviations for the intended audience, especially in cross-functional communication. Finish an update with the implication or next step. A correct description of the past is incomplete if the meeting needs a decision about the future.
- Use only the number of decimal places justified by the method and context.
- Write the full term at first use when the audience may not share the abbreviation.
- Close with one of three endings: decision needed, action agreed, or follow-up date.
Run a five-line clarity audit
Choose a recent English email, meeting summary, or status update. Do not look only for grammar. Review whether another function could interpret and act on the message correctly.
- 1Highlight every claim about evidence, risk, quality, safety, effectiveness, or compliance. Replace any absolute word that goes beyond the available support.
- 2Circle each action. Add the owner and timing where they are known.
- 3Box every “it,” “this,” “that,” or abbreviation. Confirm that a reader outside your function would understand the reference.
- 4Split any sentence that contains more than one major finding, implication, or request.
- 5Read only the first and final sentence. Confirm that they communicate the purpose and the next step.
Interactive exercise
Practice: identify the high-impact mistake
Choose the sentence that is most precise, proportionate, and actionable.
Frequently asked questions
Are grammar mistakes dangerous in pharma?
Most small grammar mistakes are harmless if the meaning remains clear. The greater risk comes from ambiguity, unsupported certainty, inconsistent terminology, or a missing owner, unit, or next step.
Should I avoid passive voice completely?
No. Passive voice is useful when the process or result is the focus. Prefer active voice when ownership, responsibility, or timing matters.
How can I find mistakes I cannot hear myself?
Use a short checklist, read the message from the recipient’s perspective, and ask a trusted colleague to identify unclear meaning rather than correcting every grammatical detail.