My one edit to this:
I don't think it's practical to "end" the FDA, anymore than it was practical to "end" the Fed
Too much infra around it, can't replace overnight
Instead, do it like crypto. Route around with an alternative
Here, that's expanded right-to-try at state level
I don't think it's practical to "end" the FDA, anymore than it was practical to "end" the Fed
Too much infra around it, can't replace overnight
Instead, do it like crypto. Route around with an alternative
Here, that's expanded right-to-try at state level
That is, if you say "end" the Fed or FDA, it works as slogan but the establishment doesn't take it seriously. These institutions are the core of the whole system, all backlinks go into them, can't just set that to zero.
The real threat is to *build the alternative*.
The real threat is to *build the alternative*.
All Bitcoin needed was the right to exist.
Technological decentralization ensured it couldn't be easily shut down by any state. And then once that alternate pathway existed, it started outcompeting* the Fed's dollar over the long-term.
* Yes, down now, but up >10000X since '10
Technological decentralization ensured it couldn't be easily shut down by any state. And then once that alternate pathway existed, it started outcompeting* the Fed's dollar over the long-term.
* Yes, down now, but up >10000X since '10
All we need in biomedicine is the right-to-try.
Legal decentralization via right-to-try already exists in 41 states. That alternative pathway will outcompete the FDA if we just open it up more.
Indeed, it appears remdesivir was allowed by this pathway.
Legal decentralization via right-to-try already exists in 41 states. That alternative pathway will outcompete the FDA if we just open it up more.
Indeed, it appears remdesivir was allowed by this pathway.
FDA recognizes these alternative pathways as a threat.
Indeed, they've wanted to regulate CLIA labs for 10+ years.
They actually saw this emergency as a way to gain ground in a bureaucratic turf war.
That's part of why they denied EUAs to labs.
Indeed, they've wanted to regulate CLIA labs for 10+ years.
They actually saw this emergency as a way to gain ground in a bureaucratic turf war.
That's part of why they denied EUAs to labs.
Basically, like any monopolist, FDA hates pathways outside of it like:
- Right-to-try
- CLIA labs & LDTs
- Compounding pharmacies
- Off-label prescription by MDs
- Countries which aren't "harmonized" with FDA
Here's how they harass LDTs, for example:
fdalawblog.net/2019/10/regula…
- Right-to-try
- CLIA labs & LDTs
- Compounding pharmacies
- Off-label prescription by MDs
- Countries which aren't "harmonized" with FDA
Here's how they harass LDTs, for example:
fdalawblog.net/2019/10/regula…
TLDR:
Can't end the FDA, that's impractical. Would be like "ending the Fed" by shutting down the dollar.
But we can certainly exit the FDA. Can be done instantly with expanded right-to-try at state level. Get Mayo, Stanford, Harvard, etc clearing things with local regulators.
Can't end the FDA, that's impractical. Would be like "ending the Fed" by shutting down the dollar.
But we can certainly exit the FDA. Can be done instantly with expanded right-to-try at state level. Get Mayo, Stanford, Harvard, etc clearing things with local regulators.
