While the pharmaceutical companies are trying to make money, and not look out for welfare, most people who are doing the R&D are interested in welfare. They are trying to make people healthier. While many drugs absolutely have severe side effects in certain cases, does that mean that they should be removed from the market, or slapped with a warning label? You probably won't get any serious side effects from Accutane unless you're pregnant: don't give it to pregnant women or women who might be planning on it. And what if you are the FDA and you know that these drugs will help some people...and that those people who need are cursing you for delaying the release (sometimes several years)? All I'm saying is that it is tough to call, and that you can't both have every get well as soon as possible and make sure that stuff is 100% safe all the time. Just because the FDA caves to one pressure or another doesn't mean they are corrupt.
But what about the fact that drug co.'s sometimes cherry-pick study results to get the studies to say what they want? That has really bothered me ever since I read about it. The drug I heard this about was an antidepressant.
And I should add, yeah, I know that many pharm researchers are quite decent people who truly want to help others, and that it costs a LOT of money to bring a drug to market -- but I think the current system is deeply flawed in some ways. The profit motive should never be the highest or foremost, IMO.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
well, you know...
Date: 2004-11-20 10:24 pm (UTC)Re: well, you know...
Date: 2004-11-21 12:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-21 12:29 pm (UTC)