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
27
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
Islanguage,likefood,abasichumanneedwithoutwhichachildatacriticalperiodoflifecanbestarvedanddamaged?Judgin
Justiceinsocietymustincludebothafairtrialtotheaccusedandtheselectionofanappropriatepunishmentforthoseproven
TheearlyretirementofexperiencedworkersisseriouslyharmingtheUSeconomy,accordingtoanewreportfromtheHudsonInsti
BetweentheinventionofagricultureandthecommercialrevolutionthatmarkedtheendoftheMiddleAges,wealthandtechnology
Justiceinsocietymustincludebothafairtrialtotheaccusedandtheselectionofanappropriatepunishmentforthoseproven
Thedramacritic,ontheotherhand,hasnosuchadvantage.Hecannotbeselective;hemustcovereverythingthatisofferedfor
Writeanessayofnolessthan250wordsongiventopicOnWorkingTogether.Youshouldwriteneatly’ontheANSWERSHEET.1.我们在
AstothelostworldofEgypt,weknownearlyeverything______toknow.
InTheDisunitingofAmerica:ReflectionsonaMulticulturalSociety,RevisedandEnlargedEdition(W.W.Norton)Schlesingerpr
TheInternetisaglobalnetworkthatconnectsothercomputernetworks,togetherwithsoftwareandprotocolsforcontrollingthe
随机试题
肺癌最早出现的症状是
发生晕针时可使患者平卧,头部稍低。()
对绿地率的要求是:新区建设不应低于()。
关于施工现场环境噪声污染防治的说法,正确的有()。
人民法院因审理案件,需要向银行查询企业的存款资料时,查询人不得()。
控制风险和检查风险是针对下列()的重大错报风险而确定的。
维果斯基强调()在认知发展中的作用。
工地仓库里有水泥若干,第一天用掉了前一天剩余库存的1/3后又补充了500袋,第二天用掉了第一天剩余库存的1/9后又补充了400袋,此时仓库的水泥库存是原有水泥的2倍,则仓库原有水泥多少袋?()
关于我国古代刑事立法的表述,错误的是()。
在20世纪50年代,我国森林的覆盖率为19%,20世纪60年代为11%,20世纪70年代为6%,20世纪80年代不到4%,随着森林覆盖率的逐年减少,植被大量损失,削弱了土地对雨水的拦蓄作用,一下暴雨,水卷泥沙滚滚而下,使洪涝灾害逐年严重。可见,森林资源的破
最新回复
(
0
)