XPost: talk.politics.misc, or.politics, seattle.politics 
 XPost: ca.politics 
 From: lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net 
  
 hlillywh@juno.com (Hal Lillywhite) wrote: 
  
 > Lobby Dosser  wrote in message 
 > news:... 
 > 
 >> >>'cept unless I'm mistaken the Canadian vaccine producers are not 
 >> >>government owned and are allowed to make a profit.  And they face 
 >> >>much less risk of frivolous law suits.  Their government buys from 
 >> >>those private companies at taxpayer expense, they are not a pure 
 >> >>communist system. 
 >> > 
 >> > Yeah, the FDA, assorted other government relgulatory agencies, and 
 >> > greedy trial lawyers do a lot to prevent medical care in the USA 
 >> > from beings as good as it could be.  It is artificially expensive 
 >> > and providers of medical care have to cover their asses seven ways 
 >> > from Sunday. 
 > 
 >> How many lives are you willing to lose to dump the FDA? 
 >> How many family members are you willing to watch die to dump the FDA? 
 > 
 >> Do you see the hypocrisy in restricting trial lawyers, but 
 >> deregulating pharmaceutical companies? 
 > 
 > I can't answer for Mark, but IMHO, the FDA has too ofen gone overboard 
 > in a very necessary fucntion.  Clearly we need a way of assuring that 
 > drugs are safe and effective.  However I think the FDA has been too 
 > conservative in many cases.  They are trying to improve in this but it 
 > is a slow process. 
  
 I will concede both points. Why just the number of foods and additives 
 which could cause cancer if eaten exclusively is ample testimony to going 
 overboard! 
  
 > 
 > The question is not just, "How many lives are you willing to lose to 
 > dump the FDA?"  There is also the question or how many lives we are 
 > willing to lose by keeping effective treatments off the market while 
 > people who might benefit die for lack of those treatments?  This is 
 > not an easy question but it must be addressed.  Technically this is 
 > called type one and type two risk.  Type one risk is what people 
 > usually think of, something we do causes harm.  For example, a drug is 
 > released and has bad side effects. Type risk is the risk that we fail 
 > to do something that would be beneficial.  For example, we keep an 
 > effective and safe drug off the market, one that would cure cancer, 
 > AIDs etc. while people die from those diseases.  For a long time the 
 > FDA pretty much ignored type two risk.  I think they are now starting 
 > to consider it, but it is still a difficult thing. 
  
 It should and could be a real simple thing. Sign a release. 
  
 > 
 > This is also a liability problem.  Suppose you and I get together and 
 > come up with a treatment that cures 99.9% of the cases of something 
 > like breast cancer.  The only problem is that the other 0.1% of the 
 > patients die from the treatment.  We would save morfe lives than we 
 > take, but would we dare market it?  Not in today's legal climate, the 
 > families of those 0.1% would sue and win so much it would put us out 
 > of business. 
  
 Patient signs a release. Personal responsibility at its best. 
  
 > 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)