RE: Five years? Wait now, if they’ve tried it and it works, WHY FIVE YEARS???
I have a three letter acronym for you — F.D.A
I don’t think it’s even gotten to the FDA bureaucracy stage yet. If I’m not mistaken, this is a follow-on to an earlier thread here today about scientists somewhere discovering something in dirt that seems to work wonders with certain ills in mice. It isn’t even close to human testing. My guess is that it’s research hype intended to garner funding of some kind.
If I’m wrong, I’ll be first to admit, but show me something besides it working in a mouse.
And a lot of palms need to get greased.
The extended testing required by FDA is the reason America was one of the few countries that didn’t have a bunch of thalidomide babies.
But of course that success and others are never weighed against the many that have died because of delays in making drugs available.
Personally, I’ve always thought it made sense to allow voluntary experimentation on people for whom there is otherwise no successful treatment.
“Here’s a not yet thoroughly tested drug that may cure you. On the second hand, it may kill you. On the gripping hand, if you don’t take it you’ll definitely be dead within the week.”
To my mind, that’s pretty much a no-brainer. Decisions on whether to use the drug or not in this way should be left up to patients and their doctors. With careful attention paid to women of childbearing age, for obvious reasons.
This would of course require changes in our liability laws, or drug companies would never allow their products to be used in this way.
FDA has authority in GB?
Agreed F.D.A. is the problem as usual.
Because if they release it now and discover in 20 years that it causes cancer, The lawfirm of Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe will sue the maker for $500 billion dollars in a class action lawsuit.