FDA liberalization is not exactly a fringe position among economists. The basic argument is that the FDA may kill more people than it saves and may hamper medic

FDA liberalization is not exactly a fringe position among economists. The basic argument is that the FDA may kill more people than it saves and may hamper medical innovation in the long run. It's hard to measure counterfactuals, but you can measure the costs of FDA regulation which are huge, about 80% of the cost of a new drug. So the benefits of the FDA would also have to be huge to justify its existence. The arguments are out there if you are curious. You can find people that argue the position better than I can on a Hacker News comment thread.