January 16th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
The Washington Post reports that the Supreme Court declined to hear whether dying patients could be treated with drugs not yet approved by the FDA. The Bush Administration asked the Court not to hear the case, leaving intact the FDA’s decision to restrict the use of drugs that are considered safe enough only for additional testing.
“On the one hand, when existing treatments have been tried and have proven ineffective, patients who are suffering from serious diseases have an understandable interest in trying potentially effective investigational drugs, particularly when the patient’s illness is life-threatening,” Solicitor General Paul D. Clement said in a brief filed with the court.
“On the other hand, allowing patients to obtain and use unproven drugs carries a host of risks and potential detriments for the public health.”
The Solicitor General’s last comment makes little sense, unless I suppose the dying would re-sell radical medications to everyone else. The patients were terminally ill, and they wanted to try one last treatment. It would seem to me that the FDA or the health care industry would covet this group, who wouldn’t hold anyone liable if they died during the trial.
The FDA prefers instead to be the absolute judge of what is safe and not safe. This desire to look omniscient not only leaves the terminally ill without treatment but prevents the government from being an honest broker when it comes to determining what is safe and unsafe. It has incentive to save face and liability, and bureaucrats seldom put their own interests below everyone else’s.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
