Drug scare

One the one side are people without access to drugs that may help them. On the other is a government that wants to make sure that all drugs are perfectly safe. Dr. Gilbert Ross describes the assault on Avandia in this debate.

The bureaucratic agenda behind this gratuitous and unscientific attack is spelled out in the report: The authors want to create an independent drug-safety division within – but separate from – the FDA. Even though our drug regulators are the world’s most demanding, the senators and Dr. Graham want even more stringency. They have long been advocates for an even more cautious, risk-averse FDA, elevating safety above all other concerns – even at the cost of sacrificing innovative, lifesaving new drugs.

There are two trends here. One is the litigation that ensues because the ‘government’ says something isn’t safe. The other is in the growth of government.

There is already one agency involved in determining drug safety. This episode shows what happens when someone things that agency isn’t doing the job right – they suggest another agency or bureau. No wonder it is the public employee sector that is growing and that is in both quantity as well as in salary level.

Then there are the ‘science’ aspects involved in the measurement and assessment of efficacy and risk. Pharmacology is in the same vein as climatology in terms of fuzziness of measure. That fuzziness of measure is a rich field of opportunity for those who want certitude and finality in outcome.

Comments are closed.