Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Josh Bennett's avatar

Honestly, dextromethorphan is one of my favorite placebos.

I always feel a little better.

Greg's avatar

There's a compelling state interest in preventing unintentional drug overdoses. There's less of a compelling state interest in preventing people from losing tens of dollars buying (at best) marginally useful cold medicine.

So why is the first ⅔ of this article so focused on the weaker case for regulation? It makes me doubt the author's commitment to liberal value of individual freedom! Instead, I fear he just dislikes drug makers and is shoehorning his ideas into an article for a liberal magazine.

The flippant "A pickier FDA doesn’t have to be a slower FDA. We can have abundance for clinical trials..." is really the kicker. I've seen clinical trials abundance ideas that try *not to relax* the current rules (just make them more objectively applied), but I've never seen a serious argument that claims we can make the already-famously-cautious FDA both "pickier" and faster/cheaper.

16 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?