Interesting... I just returned from DC and on the flight I listen to various pod casts. One was by John Stossel and his discussion about the FDA approval of drugs and the approach taken by the federal government. One case study presented was a kid who could not get treatment for cancer (what they tried failed and were out of options) when they heard about something offered in Europe (don't remember the drug name). Long story short, the whole family moved to London for nine months so they could try the drug. Now the kid is cancer free.
If you look at the whole of the aids epidemic, people were experimenting on themselves. This is how they figured out the current treatment.
As I understand it, the current system was borne out of the '60's and thalidomide and the resulting phocomelia. It seems, though, we have really thrown the baby out with the bathwater on our current system and not letting the individual make the choices ON THEIR OWN BODY, especially in cases such as presented in this thread.
It makes you wonder if the government should be doing it at all. Freedom, especially for the adult populace, sometimes requires risk that you may or may not be successful. In this case, taking the risk to improve your quality and / or length of life.
Sure, people ought to be accountable for their actions - you harm someone else (even if you are on drugs), you go to jail (or worse). Of course, I strongly recommend working with a doctor.
It makes you wonder why innovation is not happening significantly more and what could be done to improve the competition between pharmaceutical vendors. Clearly there is a market.
I'll keep you in prayer!
__________________
-- Joe
|