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 -
I favor more complete and careful uptake of real-world efficacy data, perhaps through the FDA or in a process/platform moderated by the agency.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
"Real world" effectiveness data are very problematic for drugs for which there are significant placebo effects, such as pain medications and antidepressants. Also, there could be a lot of harm in the "real world" before such systems notice.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes. I'm talking cancer drugs and objective responses (including stable disease).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I would counter that, as Vinay has shown, those "objective" responses might not be so objective.
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.