3 ms·

Yeah… good luck with that hope. Have you haerd of Exxon? The Sacklers held on for 20 years on Oxycontin…

• atleta 5y ago
  What does Exxon have to do with the FDA or how medications are authorized? Also, I don't think that the manufacturer of Oxycontin has tricked the authorization process (and then successfully covered up this fact for 20 years). As far as I know, the problem was their marketing strategy, how they convinced doctors (medical practitioners) and probably patients (I can remember the details). So while it's troubling, it's a completely unrelated process and thus unrelated issue.
  • octopoc 5y ago
    > What does Exxon have to do with the FDA or how medications are authorized? It proves that the FDA shouldn't use a "trust, and don't verify" approach to medical trials performed by megacorporations.
    • atleta 5y ago
      Again, what does exactly the Exxon case 'prove' here? Also, how? Which act of theirs? (I'm pretty sure I miss a lot of details there and that might be the reason I have no idea what connection are you drawing here.) Also, no one said "trust and don't verify". What was said is that they don't have to verify all the data and read through all the pages. Because the risk is just too high and they will obviously look into the details here and there.
• adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
  And Oxycontin works, and was correctly approved by the FDA. The problem there wasn't approval, it was how it was used post-approval. That's not an argument that they shouldn't have authorized the drug.