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
44
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
Thelawofprivateinternationaltribunalswithrespecttoconflictsofinterestofarbitratorsisquiteextensive,albeitbyno
Thelawofprivateinternationaltribunalswithrespecttoconflictsofinterestofarbitratorsisquiteextensive,albeitbyno
Themarveloustelephoneandtelevisionnetworkthathasnowenmeshedthewholeworld,makingallmenneighbors,cannotbeextend
Themarveloustelephoneandtelevisionnetworkthathasnowenmeshedthewholeworld,makingallmenneighbors,cannotbeextend
Variousinnovationshavebeenintroducedaswaystobreakoffoursystemwhichforcesstudentsthroughaseriesofidenticalcla
Whenitcomestotheslowingeconomy,EllenSpiroisn’tbitinghernailsjustyet.Butthe47-year-oldmanicuristisn’tcutting,
Governmenthastraditionallybeenevaluatedintermsoftheireffectsinpromotingseveralprinciples.Wehaveseenthatoneof
Governmenthastraditionallybeenevaluatedintermsoftheireffectsinpromotingseveralprinciples.Wehaveseenthatoneof
Writeanessayofnolessthan250wordsongiventopicOnWorkingTogether.Youshouldwriteneatly’ontheANSWERSHEET.1.我们在
随机试题
从生产运营战略的横向考察,所有生产运营流程都涉及转化过程,但是转化过程会在一些方面有所不同。这些方面通常包括()。
冠心病时不可能出现下述哪种病变:
A.肠套叠B.小肠扭转C.肠系膜血管栓塞D.粘连性肠梗阻E.乙状结肠扭转有心瓣膜病和房颤史的病人发生剧烈腹痛应考虑
男,20岁,因重度哮喘发作住院治疗缓解,出院后推荐其长期使用的药物是
属于技术事故的是属于责任事故的是
审慎是指行为过程中的谨慎认真与人们在行为之前的周密
水工隧洞初步设计阶段勘察,高水头压力管道地段宜进行()。
王某是江城市人,自2011年起开始担任生产音响设备的民营企业江城市前锦电子有限责任公司总经理,月薪15000元。任职期间,在办理相关手续后,王某在2012年又兼任生产汽车音响设备的江城市鹏程电子有限责任公司副经理,当年从该公司领取报酬10万元
一个小孩拿起石头,打碎了商店的窗玻璃。做错了事情的孩子跑掉了,商店老板自认倒霉,拿出一笔钱去买玻璃重新安上;这下,玻璃店有了生意,赚到了一笔小钱;玻璃店店主用这笔钱去面包店买了面包,面包店又有活干了;面包店老板又去农民那里买进了几斤面粉……仅仅碎了一块玻璃
IfIhadn’tstoodundertheladdertocatchyouwhenyoufell,you______now.
最新回复
(
0
)