{"by":"tetrometal","id":24213445,"kids":[24217931],"parent":24210997,"text":"> It sounds like your suggestion would lower the bar for both these aspects, and only catch issues after the fact - something which could have fatal consequences.<p>The other side of this is:<p>1) Since the FDA is a monopoly, it's entirely possible (and probably demonstrable) that they've set the <i>wrong</i> bars, which could have fatal consequences.<p>2) It's arguable that the costs imposed by the FDA may have fatal consequences themselves, in the form we're seeing today, where life-saving drugs (antibiotics, in this case) can't be developed because of them.<p>I'm interested in hearing your response to the above two points. I'd also be interested to hear what you'd think of a "de-fanged" FDA wherein they are able to approve or disapprove medications, but are not able to <i>enforce</i> those decisions. People would be allowed to do with their own bodies as they please, but they'd be able to reference the FDA to make those decisions.","time":1597859188,"type":"comment"}