I'll Risk Being Bewildered
10 July 2007
Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071
Dear Editor:
Jay Markowitz defends the FDA's drug-review process by asserting that, without it, "doctors and patients would be faced with a bewildering array of choices with no way to tell which is best" (Letters, July 10). Dr. Markowitz is mistaken.
First, there is no objective 'best' treatment for any illness. One patient's tolerance for risk differs from another patient's tolerance, and her illness might be more advanced than his. Second, if persons closest to each case - each patient and his or her physician - will be paralyzed by "a bewildering array" of treatment choices, why suppose that FDA staffers are immune to such bewilderment? The process for discovering effective drugs is stymied, not enhanced, by funneling a "bewildering" number of choices through a politically influenced bureaucracy.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University
Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071
Dear Editor:
Jay Markowitz defends the FDA's drug-review process by asserting that, without it, "doctors and patients would be faced with a bewildering array of choices with no way to tell which is best" (Letters, July 10). Dr. Markowitz is mistaken.
First, there is no objective 'best' treatment for any illness. One patient's tolerance for risk differs from another patient's tolerance, and her illness might be more advanced than his. Second, if persons closest to each case - each patient and his or her physician - will be paralyzed by "a bewildering array" of treatment choices, why suppose that FDA staffers are immune to such bewilderment? The process for discovering effective drugs is stymied, not enhanced, by funneling a "bewildering" number of choices through a politically influenced bureaucracy.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University
Posted by Don Boudreaux on
Saturday February 9, 2008 at 5:27pm