As the enactment of a competition law seems like a forgone conclusion, some in HK have started contemplating whether we would need a consumer protection law. Read more here.
Let's take a close look of an example of how one government agency in the name of protecting patients (consumers of drugs) actually harms them.
FDA in the US rejected Genasense, a new drug developed by a small company Genta to treat patients with CLL. Genat filed an appeal in early April.
And according to an oped in WSJ:
"Genta's announcement of the filing included a statement from one of the expert physicians: "It is puzzling that they would deny approval to a drug that met its primary and key secondary endpoint, especially since these findings were observed in the only randomized controlled trial that has ever been conducted in patients with relapsed CLL."
The FDA's handling of Genasense lays bare the all too common, aggressive incompetence of the FDA's cancer-drug division and should lead to an immediate examination of its policies and leadership, followed by swift corrective action. As for the FDA's belief that their power to control us and even deny us the pursuit of life itself is unlimited under the Constitution, we can only hope the appeals court disagrees. An agency that blocks progress against deadly diseases -- while arguing that its power to do so is above challenge -- is in dire need of a court supervised review."
Read the whole thing here.
Well, why I should I trust this writer you say. Sure, so you want scientific evidence on why the costs of having a FDA outweigh the benefits. Read this, and decide for yourself whether you still want it afterwards.