Judicial interference with mifepristone : " The FDA is a unique institution, bringing together intellectual resources from inside and outside government to make decisions on thousands of products each year. Once courts dismiss core scientific judgments by the agency, there is no reason to believe they will limit themselves to this one medication. There is already political pressure against vaccines, antidepressants and other psychotropic medication, and certain cell-derived therapies. If judges begin to dictate the terms of medication access, then others will seek to use ideology and influence to advance their agendas." https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adi2587
@freemo I can agree with you on much of the implementation of the FDA in real life downside, and, I would imagine, on the parallel fact that if this is defeated in the Supreme Court it will likely have more to do with Big Money pressure from Big Pharma than judicial reasoning. The court opinions so far have been very much based on right wing dogma.
On the other hand, the FDA, is, or at least certainly ought to be, the mechanism by which scientific evidence should be able to restrain the worst attributes of Big Pharma and ideological fanatics.
Regulation by political pressure and the courts would be, in my opinion, be a complete disaster.
🇳🇱
@Gaythia We should do what a lot of countries do... throw away the FDA, and let people decide what they put in their own damn body... We dont need someone to regulate what we can or cant put in our bodies... if we want someone to tell us thats what doctors are for, but if we want to decide for ourselves that should also be an option.
@Gaythia I am in agreemnt , particularly about the right.. my fear would be instead of going the direction I want (forcing ht eFDA to allow medication it wouldnt normally) it may go the opposite direction (forcing the FDA to make certain drugs illegal).. .that would be far worse a situation...
@freemo I think we are mostly in agreement. In a more perfect system, the FDA would operate independently of pressures from Big Pharma, which has led to excesses of regulation for things that would be available outside of their profit sphere (like weed), but also inadequate protections from their promoted products. One of my childhood inspirations for a career in science was Francis Oldham Kelsey and her work on thalidomide.
@Gaythia In an ideal world FDA would be a optional certification medical products can have. and would be a non-profit company and not government run.
@freemo Missed this comment. I don't agree, in that I don't think that ignorant, gullible people ought to be swept in by highly promoted quackery if we can help it.
@Gaythia I think highly gullible people have the right to decide for themselves if they are highly gullible and if they wish to invest in quakery, that is theirr choice.
I beleive in the ultimate rule of bodily autonomy... I dont think abortion is moral either but I think a person has a right to do what they want with their body. If I am ok with them killing unborn babies then I should also be ok with them getting to decide for themselves what drugs they want to put in there or not.
@freemo who would have done the research needed to let people know that thalidomide, a drug then being prescribed for morning sickness, was the cause of fetal development abnormalities resulting in serious birth defects?
@Gaythia If the FDA didnt have the power to make laws, but instead was more of a certification, then it would still have been the FDA.. It is just up to the person if it applies to them or matters.
@Gaythia The FDA are the guys who have made weed, literally a plant that has no dangerous properties of any kind, illegal... Yea sorry but overrulling the FDA is exactly what I WANT the courts to do, ideally more often not less.. In fact I wouldnt mind abolishing the FDA all together they have an abusive and oppressive history IMO.