dNovo new promissing player in the stemcell race

Raccooner

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
82
No one needs protecting from Brotzu. It's not dangerous, and the FDA has no authority over it. The FDA is supposed to be there to protect us from dangerous drugs. It does that, but what it also does is drive up the cost of development, preventing life-saving drugs from ever being explored because the cost of development is too high. If it wasn't for the Chinese we wouldn't be getting Bayer's PRLR antibody because the FDA stifles R&D. It needs major reform to reduce the regulatory burden and speed up the process so it serves to enable R&D rather than enriching megacap biotechs by preventing better drugs from coming to market. Finasteride should have been obsolete a decade ago, yet Merck is still making billions from it thanks to the FDA.
If the FDA is a protection racket then they need to be disbanded. I think they shouldn't have the final say of what can and cannot be permitted. pegasus2 gave really good examples why we would be better off without the FDA overall. I think there's no problem if the FDA wishes to recommend or not of certain products or procedures but they should not be involved in determining who gets to do what kind of research. The USA is falling behind in research advances compared to other countries due to their interference. Wish there was a way to get them off our backs. They are a medical mafia.
 

Roeysdomi

Experienced Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
296
No one needs protecting from Brotzu. It's not dangerous, and the FDA has no authority over it. The FDA is supposed to be there to protect us from dangerous drugs. It does that, but what it also does is drive up the cost of development, preventing life-saving drugs from ever being explored because the cost of development is too high. If it wasn't for the Chinese we wouldn't be getting Bayer's PRLR antibody because the FDA stifles R&D. It needs major reform to reduce the regulatory burden and speed up the process so it serves to enable R&D rather than enriching megacap biotechs by preventing better drugs from coming to market. Finasteride should have been obsolete a decade ago, yet Merck is still making billions from it thanks to the FDA.
You are right in some part . But the FDA hols some trashold for the company that want to show drug effcienty, if the company dosent provide legit prof for that they will not approve that. And as i said when a company has a product that is effective and safe they will pass the FDA . You right about how slow the process is
 

5minutesbeforemiracle

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
153
If the FDA is a protection racket then they need to be disbanded. I think they shouldn't have the final say of what can and cannot be permitted. pegasus2 gave really good examples why we would be better off without the FDA overall. I think there's no problem if the FDA wishes to recommend or not of certain products or procedures but they should not be involved in determining who gets to do what kind of research. The USA is falling behind in research advances compared to other countries due to their interference. Wish there was a way to get them off our backs. They are a medical mafia.
You always need some approval agency, wtf Otherwise a lot of people will get sick before a drug is pulled off the market.
 

JohnDoe5

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
42
You always need some approval agency, wtf Otherwise a lot of people will get sick before a drug is pulled off the market.
It could be worse than a lot of people getting sick if there is no approval agency...a lot of people could die if there is no approval agency. In fact, that is why the FDA was created. It was created because a lot of people died since there was no regulatory agency controlling what could and couldn't be put into the marketplace.

 
Last edited:

Joxy

Established Member
Reaction score
424
Many people try to sell scum and dangerous products, so we need control body like FDA.
 
Top