In most cases it doesn’t. In most cases the FDA tells companies to do research and then show the FDA the results of that research so that the FDA approves the product.
To be fair, you simply spoke about the cluster of beliefs that many people have and many people probably do believe that the FDA does extensive research on their own.
Issues like the fraud at Ranbaxy aren’t well known.
Specifically, around 10 percent of drugs which make it to Phase I clinical trials eventually get approved by the FDA, and many more drug candidates fail before reaching Phase I clinical trials. So, the FDA has to very carefully reject the vast majority of drugs which pharmaceutical companies attempt to get approved. Since most of the drugs which are submitted for FDA approval don’t meet the FDA standards, it is not surprising that some drugs with negative side-effects get approved.
In most cases it doesn’t. In most cases the FDA tells companies to do research and then show the FDA the results of that research so that the FDA approves the product.
Okay, so FDA is one step removed, and is reviewing the research rather than doing it themselves.
To be fair, you simply spoke about the cluster of beliefs that many people have and many people probably do believe that the FDA does extensive research on their own.
Issues like the fraud at Ranbaxy aren’t well known.
Correct.
Specifically, around 10 percent of drugs which make it to Phase I clinical trials eventually get approved by the FDA, and many more drug candidates fail before reaching Phase I clinical trials. So, the FDA has to very carefully reject the vast majority of drugs which pharmaceutical companies attempt to get approved. Since most of the drugs which are submitted for FDA approval don’t meet the FDA standards, it is not surprising that some drugs with negative side-effects get approved.