> Thus, he concluded, “(the) penalties imposed by the marketplace on sellers of ineffective drugs prior to 1962 seem to have been enough of a deterrent to have

> Thus, he concluded, “(the) penalties imposed by the marketplace on sellers of ineffective drugs prior to 1962 seem to have been enough of a deterrent to have left little room for improvement by a regulatory agency” Amount of homeotherapy currently on the shelves bring "penalties imposed by the marketplace on sellers of ineffective drugs" into a sharp contrast... People will take pure water if you tell them it works. EDIT: But I suppose a complex measure of: removing efficacy requirements AND banning advertising to both consumers and doctors AND mandating pre-regisration of trials might lead to more drugs on the market with companies using efficacy trials to compete with each other and doctors selecting best drugs based on cost/benefit/harm analysis. I'm sure there are loopholes that would be promptly exploited in this scheme given enough incentive though.