[lbo-talk] Lanier v Merck: masterful lawyering

andie nachgeborenen andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com
Tue Aug 23 08:57:42 PDT 2005


It IS possible to fight for modest legislative and regulatory rteforms,a nd even win these, especially after something had gone spectacularly wrong, as (it seems) something did with Vioxx. After all, the FDA itself was created as the result of one of those reforms. largely in the backwash of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, which revealed that Swift and Armour, etc, were feeding the nation tinned Lithuanians.

In my contrarian mode, I really do think that that Pharma is in a way overregulated, too much delay in introduction of new drugs that are considered safe and are wide available elsewhere. I believe in strong and clear warning requirements imposed on Pharma and the Drs, and letting grownups make their own decisions.

--- Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:


>
>
> Doug Henwood wrote:
> >
> >
> > True enough, but again, what's your point? Should
> we fight for a
> > different FDA, or just give up on everything?
>
> Your alternatives are identical, and hence not
> alternatives. We, whoever
> you mean by we, are not going to get a different
> FDA under either the
> RP or the DP. Hence arguing for that is the same as
> just giving up.
>
> The trouble with posing pseudo-alterntives is that
> they then usurp the
> intellectual and political space which could
> otherwise be devoted to
> discovering _actual_ alternatives.
>
> You make the same error over and over again. You
> balance alternatives
> which exist and can exist only in purely mental
> space, and then
> judiciously propound that Alternative A is certainly
> better than
> Alternative A.
>
> Carrol
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>

____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list