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
99
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.
It can be said that the people who first started the quiet drug revolution are ______.
选项
A、doctors
B、government officials
C、AIDS patients
D、pharmacologists
答案
C
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/lHhO777K
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
AmericaLosesaGreatPublicThinkerArthurMiller’sdeathlastweekmeantmorethanthelossofanoutstandingplaywright.
Themarveloustelephoneandtelevisionnetworkthathasnowenmeshedthewholeworld,makingallmenneighbors,cannotbeextend
TheearlyretirementofexperiencedworkersisseriouslyharmingtheUSeconomy,accordingtoanewreportfromtheHudsonInsti
Hispleasantways______meintothinkingthathewasmygoodfriend.
Youshouldspendabout20minutesonthistask.Yourentahousethroughanagency.Theheatingsystemhasstoppedworking:
BetweentheinventionofagricultureandthecommercialrevolutionthatmarkedtheendoftheMiddleAges,wealthandtechnology
Inaperfectlyfreeandopenmarketeconomy,thetypeofemployer--governmentorprivate-shouldhavelittleornoimpactonthe
Itis3A.M.everythingontheuniversitycampusseemsghostlikeinthequiet,mistydarkness-everythingexceptthecomputerce
MorethanhalfofallJewsmarriedinU.S.since1990havewedpeoplewhoaren’tJewish.Nearly480,000Americanchildrentrader
TheInternetisaglobalnetworkthatconnectsothercomputernetworks,togetherwithsoftwareandprotocolsforcontrollingthe
随机试题
当胆红素超过正常范围,但又在34.2mmol/L以内,肉眼难于察觉,称为隐性黄疸。()
下列选项中,不属于城市热转换设施中热力站的作用的是()。
长江股份有限公司(以下简称长江公司)有关无形资产业务如下:(1)20×1年1月,长江公司以银行存款2400万元购入一项土地使用权,使用年限为50年(不考虑相关税费)。(2)20×1年6月,长江公司研发部门准备研究开发一项专利技术。在研究
下列关于出口货物完税价格的规定,说法不正确的有()。
【2015.广西】教育心理学的早期研究主要集中在学生的()。
请求赔偿精神损害必须是造成他人()。
感觉适应是指感觉系统(如视觉、听觉等)对持续作用的刺激输入的反应逐渐减少的现象。感觉对比是指同一刺激因背景不同而产生的感觉差异的现象。根据上述定义,下列现象中属于感觉对比的是:
毛泽东提出,处理中共与民主党派的关系,应坚持的方针是()
下列各选项中,不是可视化编程方法特点的是()。
A、Ignoringthegeneralmeaningofthetext.B、Payinglittleattentiontotheprintingmistakes.C、Pursuingathoroughunderstand
最新回复
(
0
)