I know you are making an argumentum ad absurdum, but many hold exactly this position.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @matthewherper @VPrasadMDMPH
We need the FDA primarily to assure drug safety and quality, including that medicine sold as X is exactly X. Efficacy as value is subjective, and also fluid in context of new and competing Rx. So what's questionable is if the FDA can--or should--judge efficacy.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ESchattner @VPrasadMDMPH
The FDA should judge efficacy, and without that I don’t know what trials we get.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Unfortunately, the current administration wants through deregulation and "faster track" approval, in essence, to go to a de facto standard that resembles the pre-1962 standard where the FDA only had to require evidence of safety, but not efficacy.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @matthewherper and
This tendency to want a pre-Kefauver Harris standard is not due to any rational consideration of the costs, risks, and benefits of lowering the standard for drug approval but almost entirely due to a hostility towards all regulation (other than regulation women's health).
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @matthewherper and
Of course, this tendency to loosen FDA approval standards long predates the Trump administration, but the Trump administration accelerated it and put it on steroids. Scott Gottlieb was the "least worst" choice for FDA Commissioner at the time.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
The other two candidates for FDA Commissioner considered were cronies of über-libertarian Peter Thiel. One, William O'Neill, is a free market fundamentalist who advocated "proving efficacy" after drugs have "been legalized."https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/donald-trump-vs-the-fda-be-afraid-be-very-afraid-of-the-loosening-of-drug-approval-standards/ …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.