FDA’s Lethal Regulations

FDA's Lethal Regulations
FDA’s Lethal Regulations

As with all regulatory agencies when left unchecked, the FDA causes great harm through its hyper-authoritarian stances and rules as well as preventing harm through other rules. It’s why such agencies, operating outside of legislation but having the force of law, need to be regularly checked and forced to defend their actions by properly elected officials.

A perfect case in point is the FDA’s lethal regulations that categorically and absolutely forbid drug manufacturers engaging in any form of speech which can be construed as describing or promoting a use of their drug(s) for any use other than an the FDA approved on-label use, even if the information about this other use is entirely truthful, totally non-misleading, and could help physicians better treat their patients.

As a result of the FDA’s interpretation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), manufacturers of pharmaceuticals may face severe penalties for disseminating truthful and non-misleading information about off-label uses before those uses are approved by the FDA. Indeed, some companies have paid settlements of hundreds of millions or billions of dollars in the face of threatened prosecution or trial in civil false claims cases. Governments and other private actors do not suffer the same burdens on their speech, even though the pharmaceutical manufacturer likely has the most complete, up-to-date, and useful information about the product. Moreover, even when it makes economic sense for a pharmaceutical manufacturer to seek FDA approval for a new use, the FDA can take many months or even years to approve such new uses. Patients — especially those with life-threatening conditions — cannot wait for the agency to act. Even with recent changes in the FDCA, if a new use concerns a rare disease — or the drug is off-patent — it may not be economical for the pharmaceutical manufacturer to seek approval of a new use.

Regulatory Transparency Project

And, sadly, this is lethal regulatory intransigence and tyranny. It has killed, is killing, and will continue to kill people. And all for no valid purposes other than keeping the manufacturers of pharmaceuticals on their proverbial knees before the Deep State and maintaining the perceived relevance – and budget appropriations – of the FDA.

With the FDA censoring what drug makers can publish – even when it’s true, simply presented, and efficacious – many doctors aren’t able to know that there are alternative, off-label, treatment options available for their patients. Similarly, this censorship makes it functionally and legally impossible for health insurance providers to cover the costs of those prescriptions. That has, can, and will kill people – all for the sake of the powermongers of the FDA.

This seems to be no longer be true, but in my day, if you wanted to try CHANTIX to aid you in stopping smoking, insurance wouldn’t cover it because it was an off-label use of the medication.

And, if we’re to even begin to believe the current, #Woke sorts, this is systemic racism since non-Whites, especially the Blacks, are less likely to be able to afford medications that aren’t covered by health insurance. Hence, they’re “disproportionately impacted” by the FDA’s lethal regulations upon free speech involving medicines’ uses.

Honestly, American or Democrat, everyone should be calling for a end to the FDA’s lethal regulation and censorship and calling upon the organization to account for and defend its regulations – which aren’t laws but carry the weight thereof without Legislative oversight – or be forced to abandon them.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

12 Years Of Obamacare

ObamaCare Hindenberg
12 Years Of Obamacare

Yesterday marked the 12th anniversary of Obamacare – also mendaciously and ironically known as the Affordable Care Act. But tell me, in the course of those 12 years of Obamacare, have you or anyone you know objectively benefited from it? I know that I haven’t and that nobody I know has. Then, I and most of them are Gen X Whites and not the intended beneficiaries of it.

But, 12 years is a long time, more than long enough to shake out any “birthing pains” in this sweeping piece of federal intrusion into the most personal segment of the private sector. I’d have expected to hear some crowing – or, at least happy, I-Told-You-So mention of – over its successes. But I haven’t heard or read or word.

So, tell me; has 12 years of Obamacare benefited you or anyone?

Tags: | | | | | | | | |

Pelosi’s Nightmare

Pelosi's Nightmare Before Christmas
Pelosi’s Nightmare Before Christmas

What I lot of Americans, myself included, view as a Christmas gift of sorts, is Nancy Pelosi’s Nightmare Before Christmas. While, like all Democrats, she hates the idea of reducing taxes, especially upon employers, what’s really has her screaming in the night is the GOP’s Tax Cut Bill’s provision to eradicate the Democrats’ tax penalty for not purchasing health insurance.

Yes, Pelosi’s nightmare is that the American people will no longer be forced under threat of federal reprisal to purchase something that they may or may not desire. Apparently, if we’re to believe that her histrionics are genuine, this really interferes with her sleep.

Of course, Pelosi’s singular and signature “accomplishment” of record was wildly unpopular and the mostly unmitigated failure that is generally called Obamacare. As she, again like every other Democrat to speak on the subject, believes that Obamacare’s continued existence is predicated upon the forced-purchase of health insurance, her nightmare has some basis in perceived fact.


OMG! They’re Not Forcing You To Buy Insurance

But then, if Obamacare and Pelosi’s peace of mind require that so many millions of people be threatened into purchasing an unwanted product – some, like myself, who were no longer allowed to purchase a similar product under Obamacare, whose nightmare should reign supreme, Pelosi’s or those millions of Americans’?

Frankly, it seems to me that Pelosi’s Nightmare Before Christmas is a Christmas gift to us.

Tags: | | | | | | | | |

Got It! Now What?

Got It! Now What?
Got It! Now What?

With incoming President Trump, the House having maintained it GOP majority 247:194, and the Senate being 52:48 weighted towards the Republicans the long chase to repeal the dysfunctional morass that is ObamaCare is over. We won and our Republican Representatives and Senators have taken the first steps towards repealing the ACA. But now what? In the last year Congress has moved beyond a blind call to repeal it to a somewhat more pragmatic drive to repeal and replace the ACA aka ObamaCare with something more in keeping with American culture and ideals, more sustainable moving forward, and less more in touch with the realities on the ground. But what will that look like and have any members of Congress actually put the work in to figure it out?

In some ways and in a very real sense victory is the greatest threat to success and any and all attempts to repeal and replace ObamaCare, especially when simultaneously dealing with the Lamestream Enemedia, are exemplars of this. Now that there is no real reason not to do so, Congress and, to a lesser extent, President Trump are going to actually have to do what they swore to do…and do it in a way that we, the People can support or, at least tolerate…and do it under the scrutiny and in the face of “journalists” who will do anything and say anything to spin such actions in the most negative light possible.

Frankly, I don’t envy them in the slightest. I do, however, hope but am not certain of their having been confident enough in the rebirth, renewal, and restoration of America that they actual believed they’d be in this position and that their calls for repealing – and now replacing – ObamaCare were somewhat more than a mindless chant to gain votes.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | |