Analysis Of The Pure Food And Drug Act Of 1906
Central planning and control through approval to market a drug for specific indications.
The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 was one of a series of consumer protection acts in the 20th century, establishing a federal role in food and drug packaging and purity. The law was replaced by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938. Increasingly the federal administration has, in in its decisions, been influenced by pharmaceutical companies, who provide information. In addition, financing of the agency is now almost entirely through payments by the companies being regulated.
In the prescribing of drugs, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval is more and more important.
Dr. David Graham, with the FDA for over 20 years, speaking outside …show more content…
In 73% of the 221 drug reviews conducted between 2001 and 2004 there was a financial conflict of interest with the affected company or product competitors involving one or more panel members. Only 1% of the 3000 panelists were recused (disqualified) within the same period, despite investments exceeding $25,000 or grants exceeding $100,000. In the case of Vioxx (and other controversial painkillers such as Celebrex and Bextra) ten members with direct links to the drug industry were on the panel that approved …show more content…
Now one realization that will result in a sinking feeling in the pit of our stomachs is that the drug companies, salivating at the prospect of bonuses and profits, routinely hide outcomes unfavorable to their drugs.
But an even worse realization is that nobody takes unprofitable drugs through the approval process. Well, you ask, "Doesn't Profitability Mean It is a Good Drug, and, conversely, if a Drug is not Profitable, doesn't that mean it is not a Good Drug?" In a word (repeated for emphasis, No, No, No).
Nobody takes the seven out of eight unpatentable drugs through the approval process. Nobody, for example, can patent aspirin. Nobody can patent penicillin, or tetracycline, or erythromycin, or streptomycin, or (on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and
The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 was one of a series of consumer protection acts in the 20th century, establishing a federal role in food and drug packaging and purity. The law was replaced by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938. Increasingly the federal administration has, in in its decisions, been influenced by pharmaceutical companies, who provide information. In addition, financing of the agency is now almost entirely through payments by the companies being regulated.
In the prescribing of drugs, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval is more and more important.
Dr. David Graham, with the FDA for over 20 years, speaking outside …show more content…
In 73% of the 221 drug reviews conducted between 2001 and 2004 there was a financial conflict of interest with the affected company or product competitors involving one or more panel members. Only 1% of the 3000 panelists were recused (disqualified) within the same period, despite investments exceeding $25,000 or grants exceeding $100,000. In the case of Vioxx (and other controversial painkillers such as Celebrex and Bextra) ten members with direct links to the drug industry were on the panel that approved …show more content…
Now one realization that will result in a sinking feeling in the pit of our stomachs is that the drug companies, salivating at the prospect of bonuses and profits, routinely hide outcomes unfavorable to their drugs.
But an even worse realization is that nobody takes unprofitable drugs through the approval process. Well, you ask, "Doesn't Profitability Mean It is a Good Drug, and, conversely, if a Drug is not Profitable, doesn't that mean it is not a Good Drug?" In a word (repeated for emphasis, No, No, No).
Nobody takes the seven out of eight unpatentable drugs through the approval process. Nobody, for example, can patent aspirin. Nobody can patent penicillin, or tetracycline, or erythromycin, or streptomycin, or (on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and