5 ms·
I don't get your point. The FDA approval system is not the problem. It is scientific and one of the toughest approval processes worldwide. It has improved drama
by pinaceae 14y ago
I don't get your point. The FDA approval system is not the problem. It is scientific and one of the toughest approval processes worldwide. It has improved dramatically in the last 15 years.
Speeding up the process would be dangerous as it is about human health and side effects take time to surface. You want to be really sure before you approve a new molecule. Contergan showed what can go wrong.
And the FDA process being public is a good thing too. Transparency is important. Just like openly documented patent claims.
- loup-vaillant 14y agoOkay, if we can't help it, let's have an expensive approval procedure. I'm willing to accept this cost is a necessary evil. That doesn't mean however that patents are the only solution. There are other forms of government interventions. We could make a Manhattan project dedicated at lengthening healthy life expectancy, for instance (who wouldn't like to live a few more healthy decades?). Or we could grant more money to private parties making promising claims. Or we could grant prizes for achieving particular goals (like finding a cure or a vaccine for such and such disease). > Transparency is important. Just like openly documented patent claims. The document is a good thing. The monopoly that goes with it is another matter. Promising a monopoly over inventions speed inventors up, but granting one such monopoly slows everyone else down. Plus the costs induced by the patent approval system, and litigations. I doubt this is a good trade-off.