Executive summary: The FDA should be stripped of its regulatory authority and transformed into a voluntary informational and labeling body to reduce healthcare costs and spur medical innovation.
Key points:
Doctors already commonly prescribe drugs for off-label uses, so removing mandatory FDA approval won’t increase liability or prescriptions barriers.
The FDA’s conservative approval process likely causes more harm through delays than doctors’ bad prescriptions cause.
The FDA could still produce drug safety and efficacy data in a voluntary labeling role.
Neither the current FDA nor proposed alternatives solve issues with insurance incentives.
Non-binding FDA labeling allows cheaper, faster drug development while retaining labeling incentives.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The FDA should be stripped of its regulatory authority and transformed into a voluntary informational and labeling body to reduce healthcare costs and spur medical innovation.
Key points:
Doctors already commonly prescribe drugs for off-label uses, so removing mandatory FDA approval won’t increase liability or prescriptions barriers.
The FDA’s conservative approval process likely causes more harm through delays than doctors’ bad prescriptions cause.
The FDA could still produce drug safety and efficacy data in a voluntary labeling role.
Neither the current FDA nor proposed alternatives solve issues with insurance incentives.
Non-binding FDA labeling allows cheaper, faster drug development while retaining labeling incentives.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
This is a good summary of the post’s arguments, but I think misses one key detail: that this post is a response to a post by Scott.