首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Without fanfare or legislation, the government is orchestrating a quiet revolution in how it regulates new medicines. The revolu
Without fanfare or legislation, the government is orchestrating a quiet revolution in how it regulates new medicines. The revolu
admin
2013-11-29
49
问题
Without fanfare or legislation, the government is orchestrating a quiet revolution in how it regulates new medicines. The revolution is based on the idea that the sicker people are, the more freedom they should have to try drugs that are not yet fully tested. For fifty years government policy has been driven by another idea: the fear that insufficiently tested medicines could cause deaths and injuries. The urgent needs of people infected with HIV, the AIDS virus, and the possibility of meeting them with new drugs have created a compelling countervailing force to the continuing concern with safety. As a result, government rules and practices have begun to change. Each step is controversial. But the shift has already gone far beyond AIDS. New ways are emerging for very sick people to try some experimental drugs before they are marketed. People with the most serious forms of heart disease, cancer, emphysema, Alzheimer’ s or Parkinson’ s disease, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, diabetes, or other grave illnesses can request such drugs through their doctors and are likelier to get them than they would have been four years ago. "We’ve been too rigid in not making lifesaving drugs available to people who otherwise face certain death," says Representative Henry Waxman, of California, who heads the subcommittee that considers changes in drug-approval policies. "It’s true of AIDS, but it’s also true of cancer and other life- threatening diseases."
For the first time, desperate patients have become a potent political force for making new medicines available quickly. People with AIDS and their advocates, younger and angrier than most heart-disease or cancer patients, are drawing on two decades of gay activists’ success in organizing to get what they want from politicians. At times they found themselves allied with Reagan Administration deregulators, scientists, industry representatives, FDA staff members, and sympathetic members of Congress. They organized their own clinical trials and searched out promising drugs here and abroad. The result is a familiar Washington story: a crisis—AIDS—helped crystallize an informal coalition for reform.
AIDS gave new power to old complaints. As early as the 1970s the drug industry and some independent authorities worried that the Food and Do, g Administration’ s testing requirements were so demanding that new drugs were being unreasonably delayed. Beginning in 1972, several studies indicated that the United States had lost its lead in marketing new medicines and that breakthrough drugs—those that show new promise in treating serious or life-threatening diseases— had come to be available much sooner in other countries. Two high-level commissions urged the early release of breakthrough drugs. So did the Carter Administration, but the legislation it pro- posed died in Congress. Complaints were compounded by growing concern that "if we didn’t streamline policies, red tape wot, Id be an obstacle to the development of the biotechnology revolution," as Frank E. Young, who was the head of the FDA from 1984 to 1989, put it in an interview with me.
Young was a key figure in the overhaul of the FDA’s policies. A pioneer in biotechnology and a former dean of the University of Rochester’s medical school, he came to Washington with an agenda and headed the agency for five and a half years—longer than anyone else has since the 1960s. Young took the FDA job to help introduce new medicines created by biotechnology-- whose promise he had seen in his own gene-cloning lab--and to get experimental medicines to desperately iii people more quickly. He had seen people die waiting for new medicines because "they were in the wrong place at the wrong time," he said. That is now changing.
Which of the following has the direct power over the approval of new prescription drugs?
选项
A、President.
B、Congress.
C、Senate.
D、The Food and Drug Administration.
答案
D
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/SHhO777K
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
ThedomesticeconomyintheUnitedStatesexpandedinaremarkablyvigorousandsteadyfashion.Therevivalinconsumerconfiden
Thelawofprivateinternationaltribunalswithrespecttoconflictsofinterestofarbitratorsisquiteextensive,albeitbyno
Islanguage,likefood,abasichumanneedwithoutwhichachildatacriticalperiodoflifecanbestarvedanddamaged?Judgin
TheBritishgovernmenthasdecidedtowipeouttheobesityepidemicthroughanovelstrategy-byofferingfatpeoplecashincenti
Strictsanitaryproceduresformulatedbyourmunicipalgovernmenthelptoout-breaksofdiseases.
BetweentheinventionofagricultureandthecommercialrevolutionthatmarkedtheendoftheMiddleAges,wealthandtechnology
Justiceinsocietymustincludebothafairtrialtotheaccusedandtheselectionofanappropriatepunishmentforthoseproven
Itis3A.M.everythingontheuniversitycampusseemsghostlikeinthequiet,mistydarkness-everythingexceptthecomputerce
MorethanhalfofallJewsmarriedinU.S.since1990havewedpeoplewhoaren’tJewish.Nearly480,000Americanchildrentrader
InTheDisunitingofAmerica:ReflectionsonaMulticulturalSociety,RevisedandEnlargedEdition(W.W.Norton)Schlesingerpr
随机试题
教育的相对独立性的主要表现有哪些?
为进一步诊断应行上述患者的下步治疗应为
对于只由一个运算符或者多个优先级次相同的运算符(如既有加号又有减号)构成的公式,Excel将按照从左到右的顺序自动进行智能运算。()
根据以下资料回答下列题:某地财政部门在会计执法检查中,发现一些企业的下列事项:(1)入账的原始凭证没有审核人的签或盖章;(2)部分采购发票没有开具单位的盖章;(3)为逃避检查,有少数单位将一些会计资料进行了销
如图10所示是某计算机的窗口界面,下列说法错误的是()。
不得让不满()周岁的未成年人脱离监护单独居住。
以下哪些主体享有立法提案权()
AccordingtoaleadingGermanbanker,theU.S.dollaris"themostfrequentlydiscussedeconomicphenomenonofourtimes."He
AKeepingGoodRelationswithLocalBusinessmenBServiceProvidedbyLocalNewspapersCLargeCirculationoftheNationalNe
Smogissomethingcombinedbysmokeandfog.Londonisalwaysknownforits"blackfogs".Inthewinterof1952,amilkywhitef
最新回复
(
0
)