LinkC wrote:archangle wrote:
How do you suppose the FDA figures into this vast conspiracy theory that keeps you awake at night? (That's rhetorical, no need for an answer, btw...)
I'll answer anyway. It's not a conspiracy in the sense that they have an official "Medical Conspiracy Commission" that meets in secret on a regular basis. It's a system where every group involved has their own agenda which includes their own interests in addition to the interests of the general public.
The government regulator bureaucrats and politicians have self interests to add additional levels of complexity because that increases the size of their agency, their budget, and their own political power.
The professional or industry group isn't evil, but they have their own self interests. They work with the bureaucrats to justify regulations that are favorable to them. In some cases, they actually encourage unnecessary regulations because it makes it more difficult for new and efficient competitors to get into the business. If it costs millions or billions of dollars to introduce a new drug, that helps prevent a new competitor from introducing a new low cost drug that takes profit away from the existing companies.
Even if the government bureaucrats are trying to do a good job, they do meet with and work with the industry representatives all the time. They go to fancy conferences, see presentations, etc. Often paid for by the industry they're regulating.
After they leave the government, they often go to work for the industry they used to represent. Even if there is no outright bribery, there are incentives to work together and their own self interests often work in favor of each other, not in favor of the general public. This doesn't even have to be any outright corruption, either. Who better than an ex-government agency bureaucrat to help you deal with that agency? As an industry group, are you going to hire the ex-bureaucrat who fought against you at every turn, or the one who was helpful to you when he worked for the agency?
After a while, it gets to be an old boy system. They know how the other side is going to react. There is negotiation or quid quo pro. "We'll let you do X if you let us do Y. If you do Z, we'll raise a royal stink and your agency (or industry) will get a lot more public and Congressional scrutiny." They know how to manipulate each other, how far they can push things, and how they can gain from each other.
There are reasons why the drug industry and other industries spend billions of dollars each year on lobbyists, political campaigning, and government agency relations.
There's nothing that special about the medical industry in this regard. Much of the same things can be said for the regulation of Wall Street, the legal system, banking, coal, petroleum, gas, etc.
Is anyone going to suggest that our government agencies and regulatory systems are well run? Or that they aren't "in bed with" the industries they regulate? How good a job was our financial regulatory system doing keeping track of the mortgage industry, banks, and Wall Street in 2008? How well was the government agency that regulated offshore drilling doing before the BP oil spill?
It's not even unique to the USA. Many other countries have similar problems.
Read up on the history of the FDA. It's a pretty sorry story. It would take an entire web site to document their failings and incompetence bordering on corruption. The US Congress also meddles in the decisions of the FDA, for instance, allowing quack homeopathic drugs to be sold along side real medicine without any warnings on the labels.
Yes, the FDA does a lot of good stuff. I'm glad it's there. If we didn't have it, there would be a lot more dangerous drugs and medical equipment. Unfortunately, it often works against the interests of the general public. We need to understand its shortcomings and try to improve or work around it.