3 ms·
> How many people know enough to "think for themselves" in this area? How many are going to know anything beyond what the manufacturers' advertisements say? Fo
by ibeckermayer 7y ago
> How many people know enough to "think for themselves" in this area? How many are going to know anything beyond what the manufacturers' advertisements say?
For one thing, the fact that other people might not be competent enough to think for themselves is not a justification for banning those who are from doing so. For another, I agree that we need regulatory bodies to ensure our medicine is safe and effective -- just that every individual has a right to decide for themselves which regulatory body to give authority to. Science is premised on the providing logic and evidence for one's claims; a scientific regulatory body would provide logic and evidence for why we should trust their judgement. Using threats (legislative or otherwise) to force everybody in the country to trust their judgements is anti-science -- "because I fucking said so" is not a replacement for logic and evidence.
Additionally, as I stated, the standard I'm proposing includes a justified use of force for those defrauding others via false advertising claims. If it can be transparently proven that such claims are unjustified or need further qualification, then providers can rightfully be forced to change their advertising.
> I've worked for FDA-regulated medical device manufacturers twice. I didn't enjoy the experience, and no one would call them efficient, but they do not deserve the venom you are pouring on them.
I'm speaking in broad generalities, of course in any enforced institution there will be good and bad actors, and the whole spectrum in between. What I'm railing against is the corrupt political system that allows this sort of tyranny to stifle human freedom without answering probing philosophical questions such as "why am I not allowed to disagree with your determinations?"
> You rather badly need to re-calibrate your moral compass. Their mandate is "Nobody gets to poison people on my block. Nobody gets to create junk devices that kill people on my block." That is in no way morally equivalent to a gang of drug dealers.
I've already qualified my position that such criminals should be held accountable in the court of law, and in this comment qualified it further in stating that it is reasonable to set up regulatory institutions with processes to ensure safety; they simply can't justifiably be enforced.
- JohnFen 7y ago> For one thing, the fact that other people might not be competent enough to think for themselves is not a justification for banning those who are from doing so. Who is banning anyone from doing their own research or thinking? Not the FDA, as near as I can tell.
- ibeckermayer 7y ago> Who is banning anyone from doing their own research or thinking? Did you read the article? If I think that an insulin pump that automatically regulates insulin levels is a good idea, I'm not allowed to buy or sell it without the FDA's approval. The Loop project can't even buy pre-approved unsecured pumps, augment them, and sell them to people or they will be shut down by force.
- JohnFen 7y ago> Did you read the article? Yes, I did. > I'm not allowed to buy or sell it without the FDA's approval. Yes, but you're talking about commerce there, not the FDA preventing you from thinking for yourself. The FDA can't stop you from developing (or even using the knowledge of others) and building your own medical devices and treatment plans that you use on yourself. You just aren't allowed to put others at risk.
- ibeckermayer 7y agoSure, if you want to say that "I can think whatever I want, I just can't act on it" then they're not preventing me from thinking for myself. Neither is any authoritarian regime for that matter, since they can't stop people from thinking a certain way, just from acting on it. Action follows from thought, infringement on action prevents individuals from thinking and concluding for themselves.
- JohnFen 7y ago> if you want to say that "I can think whatever I want, I just can't act on it" As I specifically pointed out, you can act on it. You can make any medical device, or engage in any medical practice, for and to yourself. You just can't sell or distribute it to others.
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoYeah. But judging by his profile, ibeckermayer explicitly wants to build insulin pumps and sell/distribute them without having to go through FDA approval. So for him it comes down to "I can't act on it in the way I want to", namely, distribution. I'm with you in the camp that says that it's good that he cannot do that.