Posted on 06/29/2024 12:08:47 PM PDT by ransomnote
Bkmrk
Does the chevron decision rip the wings off the FDA? I rather think it does. Also NIAD and CDC. Now real physicians can practice medicine finally. Without Fauci who neither has a license nor has been at bedside ever who dictates crap we must work around.
“ I doubt this expose.”
It didn’t even say anything.
Hardly coherent.
Of course there are no technicians, labs, etc. The FDA is a REGULATORY organization, not an investigative organization.
They do not test, the companies making the medical devices or drugs do the testing and submit VERY extensive documentation of the results.
For an update of a heart monitor, for example, the documentation can exceed a shelf of documents three feet long!
Additionally, the FDA can come in and perform a detailed audit the development and testing process at any time and can penalize or even shut down a company for violations. I have seen this happen.
There are other agencies (e.g. NIH, CDC) that do have labs, technicians, etc. Yes, there are issues with the politicization of both of these but my basic point stands.
As for buildings and people, the National Institutes of Health main campus is in suburban Bethesda, Maryland, with five other research centers around the country. The FDA's main campus is in White Oak, Montgomery County, Maryland, with other offices around the country.
This is such BS. This writer needs to be medicated.
Just a quick glance at the FDA facilites in Montgomery Co and PG Co MD would tell you this writer is a total moron.
The FDA campus in Montgomery Co. has three bio labs and a huge physics lab. The evaluators are all doctors, pharmacists or scientists.
The Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition in PG county has labs for testing food. They have satellite offices across the nation with testing labs. All staffed by scientists, biologists and doctors.
Then there is the Center for Veterinary Medicine in PG Co. that has fish, birds and animals housed for testing and a laboratory building as well as offices.
Lacking qualified technicians and scientific staff is not one of the things to criticize FDA for.
“Does the chevron decision rip the wings off the FDA? I rather think it does. “
It could if a petitioner wants to challenge whether the laws behind the FDA are ambiguous in some way that the FDA itself has interpreted to its liking. That challenge would be different than one that only disputed the FDA’s opinion of the facts behind a ruling of theirs, which the current SCOTUS decision allows to remain controlled by the agency. They now get to interpret facts and expert opinion as they choose, but only if at the same time they have NOT devised their own interpretation of the law(s) behind their regulation. SCOTUS now says interpetation of legal ambiguity is for the courts, not the agencies.
All a forensic accountant would need to do is look at their budget for consultants and money allegedly spent on in-house work. The volume of paperwork comes from somewhere. It is either originated by those companies that benefit from the rules and regulations, like the thousands of pages of Obamacare, which appeared fully formed overnight. But if Congress asks for some particular regulations, someone had to write those. Any lab work performed would need to be billed to something. Internally, it would probably be a charge number. But externally, it’s a contracted work. We need an audit.
They only regulate. They do not research anything except the paperwork they are given by drug companies. They are involved in the study design for new drugs but have very little to do with the study itself. They just record submissions from various testing sites. Then after a drug meets the criteria for safety and efficacy and novelty of a new drug, they hire some “independent” researchers, who may be conflicted in that they have worked in this area of expertise as a consultant or grantee (sometimes clinicians) to serve as a review board and vote on whether to approve the new drug. The FDA has the final say but usually go with the review board vote. Once in a while they may ask for more study or clarification.
Yes it can often be politicized by whom they select for the review board. Or they can find a technicality and reject and application or ignore obvious errors and approve one. It comes down to the drug design, the results, and then some juice to get it approved.
This misunderstands the purpose of the FDA. That said, the decision to have applicants pay for drug review was a huge mistake. It must be repealed even if it means more taxpayer money. The FDA has a tiny lab that does limited testing. It is supposed to have technical experts who evaluate the clinical testing of supposedly independent clinical research organizations. Clinical research and regulatory review by the FDA is a hugely complex area. Do your homework.
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled FDA is a front organisation: There are no technicians in the buildings, no equipment and no sample testing occurs, gas_dr wrote: Does the chevron decision rip the wings off the FDA? I rather think it does. Also NIAD and CDC. Now real physicians can practice medicine finally. Without Fauci who neither has a license nor has been at bedside ever who dictates crap we must work around.
Throughout Covid and the Covid 'vaccine' you pushed the NIAD/CDC party line. You said Ivermectin didn't work. You said everyone in 'your' ICU was unvaccinated (PS: You're not a real doctor).
All your posts supporting the CDC's lies! I recall you saying a person can get the vax, or 'take their chances' with Covid. As if there's no risk in getting the experimental vaccine, even after people started waving the red flag in alarm.
You don't 'work around' CDC dictates. But you promote them until they are exposed and fail. Then you take the 'high ground.' Disgusting.
I am only responding as I have asked you not to post to me and you have broken this agreement. I am honored my side and not posted to you
I would like to point out that you have broken the rules of the forum. But you seem to enjoy special protection. You have maliciously stated many things in this post to me most of which is false which could be demonstrated with research if my consistent statements of the last several years. Yes I was reprimanded and put in time out for some of the things I said mostly related to heated and emotional responses. They were just.
However you imagine things and pronounce them with the air of being honest. Your statements are genuinely dishonest. The truth is it is exactly this kind of abuse that has lead me to stop contributing monthly a while back. It is exactly the reason why it is always a photo finish to complete the quarterly fund raisers.
The statements you make are quite toxic and just as we see in the election process, people quietly vote with their wallet. I did report this as abuse several hours ago with a factual statement of my complaints to the moderator. Radio silence. I can’t help but wonder if you are not a moderator and if not have such favored position that you can flagrantly make unprovable statements that are in fact lies. Either way you either are a perfect analogy as our resident judge Marchan or at the very least his family that while exercising no particular delegated power hides behind the favor of being untouchable much like his clerk and his daughter.
The truth is plain to see. It is a strong factor in the increasingly slowly volunteer funding of this site.
Have a pleasant evening.
With all due respect, I have no idea what your post is attempting to communicate.
Reading through the responses opinions are mixed as to the legitimacy of the expose article in the OP.
I respect the opinion of RN as to having worked interfacing with regulators. I continue to seek answers according to the scientific methodology as to what do we know to be true. What is opinion. Discernment is important.
If you could help me understand what you are trying to communicate here it would help me know where to look. As I have consistently done with corona virus i continue to evaluate the tenacity of data to make an educated judgment as to what is actually true. Sometimes it is hard to discern the truth when opinion is the promulgated as the truth
I recommend Dr. Campbell on YouTube.
He’s an English physician who was all in for the vaxx. If you go back through his video history, you will find the data that changed his mind. If you don’t have time, watch his latest:
https://youtu.be/AU0DxJ1vbmM?si=TnqwfW7OASRtm6vY
He’s very careful to stick to facts, so that his videos won’t be banned. And he obviously values the scientific method.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.