RE: Good journalism, including mention of an opposing viewpoint.
Some questions come up for me... what kind of treatment is allowed to be tried? if the answer is anything, then, you leave the desperate patient vulnerable to hoaxes out there ( and potentially beneficial cures as well ).
On the other hand, if the principle is LIBERTY ( i.e., Freedom to live and take risks as you see fit ), then this bill is totally compatible and in the spirit of the constitution.
Well, the article says qualifying treatments must have passed some part of the FDA process already, so I doubt this opens the door to any manner of hoax remedies. Probably they must have at least some preliminary approval but just haven’t finished all the required trials yet for final approval.
>
Some questions come up for me... what kind of treatment is allowed to be tried? if the answer is anything, then, you leave the desperate patient vulnerable to hoaxes out there ( and potentially beneficial cures as well ).
On the other hand, if the principle is LIBERTY ( i.e., Freedom to live and take risks as you see fit ), then this bill is totally compatible and in the spirit of the constitution.
>
Disagree. If the bill had obliterated the FDA, THAT would advanced the principle(s) of Liberty.
Clipping the govt ‘grass’ doesn’t kill the lawn, nor does it STAY cut, unlike pulling it up by the root.