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
74
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.
According to the passage, patients who are gravely ill ______.
选项
A、can get experimental drugs more quickly than ever before
B、are still unable to get experimental drugs because of government strict policies
C、can’t afford some expensive experimental drugs
D、refuse to be treated with experimental drugs
答案
A
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/qHhO777K
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
ThedomesticeconomyintheUnitedStatesexpandedinaremarkablyvigorousandsteadyfashion.Therevivalinconsumerconfiden
ThedomesticeconomyintheUnitedStatesexpandedinaremarkablyvigorousandsteadyfashion.Therevivalinconsumerconfiden
Thelawofprivateinternationaltribunalswithrespecttoconflictsofinterestofarbitratorsisquiteextensive,albeitbyno
Themarveloustelephoneandtelevisionnetworkthathasnowenmeshedthewholeworld,makingallmenneighbors,cannotbeextend
Themarveloustelephoneandtelevisionnetworkthathasnowenmeshedthewholeworld,makingallmenneighbors,cannotbeextend
Variousinnovationshavebeenintroducedaswaystobreakoffoursystemwhichforcesstudentsthroughaseriesofidenticalcla
Variousinnovationshavebeenintroducedaswaystobreakoffoursystemwhichforcesstudentsthroughaseriesofidenticalcla
Youheartherefrainallthetime:theU.S.economylooksgoodstatistically,butitdoesn’tfedgood.Whydoesn’tever-greater
InTheDisunitingofAmerica:ReflectionsonaMulticulturalSociety,RevisedandEnlargedEdition(W.W.Norton)Schlesingerpr
56.Realestate,inbroaddefinition,islandandeverythingmadepermanentlyapartthereof,andthenatureandextentofone’s
随机试题
标准试剂包括()。
人本主义者认为【】
为何同源重组只发生在相同或几乎相同的DNA之间?
常见环糊精有
甲、乙共同完成一项发明,就该项发明的专利申请权所作的判断中,下列哪些选项是正确的?()
曾公亮,字明仲,泉州晋江人。举进士甲科,知会稽县。民田镜湖旁,每患湖溢。公亮立斗门,泄水入曹娥江,民受其利。以端明殿学士知郑州,为政有能声盗悉窜他境至夜户不闭尝有使客亡橐中物移书诘盗公亮报吾境不藏盗殆从者之度耳索之果然公亮明练文法,更践久,习知朝廷台阁典宪
()信度高是效度高的充分而非必要的条件。
在积贫积弱的旧中国,帝国主义列强并没有能够实现瓜分中国的图谋。其原因在于()
把f(x,y)dxdy写成极坐标的累次积分,其中D={(x,y)|0≤x≤1,0≤y≤x}.
Nosooner__________thanastudentcametovisither.
最新回复
(
0
)