No—that would be relevant if I were claiming that the FDA should be abolished. Here, I’m only claiming that they do not, in fact, approve a drug if its expected benefits outweigh its expected costs. Approval appears to require something closer to a 10⁄1 benefit/cost ratio.
sorry, I was thrown off by your last sentence “Exercise for the reader: Find other cases where cautionary measures are more dangerous than nothing.” Seems like a fairly explicit point about how the fda is worse than nothing.
No—that would be relevant if I were claiming that the FDA should be abolished. Here, I’m only claiming that they do not, in fact, approve a drug if its expected benefits outweigh its expected costs. Approval appears to require something closer to a 10⁄1 benefit/cost ratio.
sorry, I was thrown off by your last sentence “Exercise for the reader: Find other cases where cautionary measures are more dangerous than nothing.” Seems like a fairly explicit point about how the fda is worse than nothing.
Oh. I see what you mean.