Who's minding the drugstore?

Nurses Activism

Published

Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.

Critics of the FDA say the agency has gotten soft on the companies it regulates, allowing some marketing claims to go too far for too long.

New York Times, June 29, 2003

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/29/business/yourmoney/29FDAA.html

You know what I think, I think pharmacy companies are big business. The Republicans are very pro big business. I think these regulatory agencies are actually under pressure from persons in the excutive branch of goverment to be pro big business.

FDA review of drugs flawed at the getgo. The agency relies and always has -- on the sponsor (pharmaceutical company) of the drug (those independent of the company/profits need not apply) to provide the science demonstrating their product's safety and efficacy. Iin other words, the fox has been guarding this hen house since day one. Not about one political party or another.

Used to be that the FDA was about safety first and foremost! Truth on efficacy predictably found its way to the forefront by use.

Wonder how many know about America's Poison Control Centers. Originally was government run, well-respected and as Americana as apple pie. However after funding dried up -- the big powerful pharmaceutical companies picked em up and ran with them.

Last heard Bayer (big in pesticides) for example funds the Pittsburgh Poison Control Center. Wouldn't be relying too much on the data out of these places.

Mr. Yuck has gotten a whole lot yuckier. :devil:

I still think federal watch dog agencies are subject to political pressure. Always have alway will be. This means all agencies including FDA.

FDA is a regulatory agency. Watchdog would apply more to a group like Nader's Public Citizen and their own Sidney Wolfe, MD who champions the medical issues, taking on FDA as well as the pharmaceutical companies. Heard on radio that Nader intends to run again for office. Have no clue what that means if anything.

+ Add a Comment