3 ms·

Many American regulatory institutions have crumbled in the past few decades, the FAA being a particularly jarring example. In some cases it seems like peoples'

Many American regulatory institutions have crumbled in the past few decades, the FAA being a particularly jarring example. In some cases it seems like peoples' trust in those regulators may be fueled by nostalgia, but the FDA does seem like one of the few agencies that has retained some measure of independence. Looking at what has happened in this nation's other industries and institutions, only one crippling decades-long medical crisis doesn't seem all that bad.

bordercases 6y ago
That's not an explanation for why the FDA has failed to address the regulatory aspects of the opioid crisis, but an argument for why we should discount or ignore that failure. At the very least – this is a non sequitur.
- meekrohprocess 6y ago
  I disagree. Regulatory capture is a clear and present danger to the United States, and it is contributing to a breakdown in accountability across all sectors of the nation's economy and society. So I offered it as an explanation for why the FDA could be well-respected and reasonably functional, while the United States fails to address some acute public health issues. Things could be much worse; at least they don't turn a blind eye when huge sums of money are not involved. It's still very rare for a drug's approval to be pushed through via fraud, and there are a lot of diseases that need treating. They have a solid track record, even now.
Clewza313 6y ago
There hasn't been a fatal crash of a US commercial airliner since 2009. Even for the 737 Max debacle Boeing deserves at least as much blame the FAA.
- sofixa 6y ago
  The FAA are the ones responsible for stopping shit like the 737Max fiasco. Yes, Boeing did it, and many people there deserve to go to prison, but the FAA is supposed to be the guardrail ensuring they can't get away with it in the first place. It was an objective failure, and it has eroded the trust in them - point in case, most other aviation regulators did their own checks on the 737 Max before allowing it back to service, which usually doesn't happen ( EASA trusts FAA's ratings and vice versa).

bordercases 6y ago

That's not an explanation for why the FDA has failed to address the regulatory aspects of the opioid crisis, but an argument for why we should discount or ignore that failure. At the very least – this is a non sequitur.

meekrohprocess 6y ago
I disagree. Regulatory capture is a clear and present danger to the United States, and it is contributing to a breakdown in accountability across all sectors of the nation's economy and society. So I offered it as an explanation for why the FDA could be well-respected and reasonably functional, while the United States fails to address some acute public health issues. Things could be much worse; at least they don't turn a blind eye when huge sums of money are not involved. It's still very rare for a drug's approval to be pushed through via fraud, and there are a lot of diseases that need treating. They have a solid track record, even now.

Clewza313 6y ago

There hasn't been a fatal crash of a US commercial airliner since 2009. Even for the 737 Max debacle Boeing deserves at least as much blame the FAA.

sofixa 6y ago
The FAA are the ones responsible for stopping shit like the 737Max fiasco. Yes, Boeing did it, and many people there deserve to go to prison, but the FAA is supposed to be the guardrail ensuring they can't get away with it in the first place. It was an objective failure, and it has eroded the trust in them - point in case, most other aviation regulators did their own checks on the 737 Max before allowing it back to service, which usually doesn't happen ( EASA trusts FAA's ratings and vice versa).