If any device is going to be monitoring something important, like insulin levels for example, I want the FDA all over it.
The FDA doesn't do anything but keep drugs out of people's hands who actually need them, and keep drug prices high for big pharma. We don't need government regulation on stuff like this. All they'll do is regulate Apple and slow down product development. I'm fine with the FDA giving guidelines that people can CHOOSE to follow, but forcing people to follow them is not my thing nor should it be anyone else's. You big government types love to regulate and control people.
Ridiculous. The FDA greatly benefits US citizens. I've had to deal with them from time to time when my clients release new medical devices. They've always seemed pretty reasonable to me.
You want to reduce government spending? I can think of a few other spending cuts that I would rather see than cutting the FDA.
Please tell us more (assuming it's not some paranoid fantasy)?
Instead of having the FDA make sure restaurants and packaged food aren't giving us something of suspect quality that is potentially harmful he would rather use ?Watch let him know if he should eat something. Maybe checking a pulse rate is better than a rating on window or nutrition label on a box¡
Judging what happen dietary supplement without FDA, I bet my life with FDA
BTW. Don't like it, swim to Africa. They have zero drug companies, and their Ebola patients are never happier.
Not really. The FDA is one of many government agencies that use a facade of public service to hide extremely illicit activity. They are run by a street gang of pharmaceutical companies that exist purely for profit, and not for human betterment. I wouldn't trust a single thing out of that agency if my life depended on it.
So, I might as well use a gadget for medical advice, compared to the FDA.
I didn't know that. It seems to be a lot more than that.
Last I heard, obesity was a weight management issue.
Yes, but my point was that weight management needn't involve a condition such as obesity.
However far the FDA's head may be up its own ass (or not),
they've been able to make that distinction, as shown by their guidelines.
You, somehow, have not.
The point is that it is an arbitrary distinction. Of course weight management doesn't necessarily involve obesity, but I don't think you can make such a clear-cut separation. How is obesity anything but a weight management issue?
I don't think the FDA is without flaws (especially on the foods and "dietary supplements" side), but TENS OF MILLIONS? That would be a tremendous scandal.
What drugs, precisely, do you have in mind that have caused (assuming you mean at least two tens of millions) about 8% of the current population of the US to die?
It can't be Fen-Phen, because the FDA *never approved* the use of those drugs in combination. They were approved separately, and it's doctors who decided to prescribe them together, off label. The FDA has no easy way to regulate off label uses of drugs.
Probably the deadliest drug ever approved by the FDA was Vioxx, but even that has only been linked to a few tens of thousands of deaths.
Like I said, they could do a lot more with food and a hell of a lot more with dietary supplements (which they can't meaningfully regulate under current laws), but the drugs issues aren't as bad as you say.
And even with Vioxx, IIRC, the issue was administering the drug for far longer than originally intended (under a year versus years and years). While the number of deaths was a statistical estimate only. "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) estimates that Vioxx may have contributed to 27,785 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths between 1999 and 2003" based on a sample patient review.
Comments
Indeed.
If any device is going to be monitoring something important, like insulin levels for example, I want the FDA all over it.
The FDA doesn't do anything but keep drugs out of people's hands who actually need them, and keep drug prices high for big pharma. We don't need government regulation on stuff like this. All they'll do is regulate Apple and slow down product development. I'm fine with the FDA giving guidelines that people can CHOOSE to follow, but forcing people to follow them is not my thing nor should it be anyone else's. You big government types love to regulate and control people.
Ridiculous. The FDA greatly benefits US citizens. I've had to deal with them from time to time when my clients release new medical devices. They've always seemed pretty reasonable to me.
You want to reduce government spending? I can think of a few other spending cuts that I would rather see than cutting the FDA.
There is no law against stupidity.
Knock yourself out.
Considering how corrupt and full of bs the FDA is I'd rather take my chances with the Apple Watch
Considering how corrupt and full of bs the FDA is I'd rather take my chances with the Apple Watch
'Corrupt'? FDA?
Please tell us more (assuming it's not some paranoid fantasy)?
Instead of having the FDA make sure restaurants and packaged food aren't giving us something of suspect quality that is potentially harmful he would rather use ?Watch let him know if he should eat something. Maybe checking a pulse rate is better than a rating on window or nutrition label on a box¡
'Corrupt'? FDA?
Please tell us more (assuming it's not some paranoid fantasy)?
https://www.google.com/search?q=fda+corruption&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
When these attributes bedevil even some of the more intelligent forums, such as AI, it is downright depressing.
I couldn't agree more.
It makes me weep.
Judging what happen dietary supplement without FDA, I bet my life with FDA
BTW. Don't like it, swim to Africa. They have zero drug companies, and their Ebola patients are never happier.
I didn't know that. It seems to be a lot more than that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration
That was amazing information with good topics and amazing discussion.
Last I heard, obesity was a weight management issue.
Yes, but my point was that weight management needn't involve a condition such as obesity.
However far the FDA's head may be up its own ass (or not),
they've been able to make that distinction, as shown by their guidelines.
You, somehow, have not.
The point is that it is an arbitrary distinction. Of course weight management doesn't necessarily involve obesity, but I don't think you can make such a clear-cut separation. How is obesity anything but a weight management issue?
I don't think the FDA is without flaws (especially on the foods and "dietary supplements" side), but TENS OF MILLIONS? That would be a tremendous scandal.
What drugs, precisely, do you have in mind that have caused (assuming you mean at least two tens of millions) about 8% of the current population of the US to die?
It can't be Fen-Phen, because the FDA *never approved* the use of those drugs in combination. They were approved separately, and it's doctors who decided to prescribe them together, off label. The FDA has no easy way to regulate off label uses of drugs.
Probably the deadliest drug ever approved by the FDA was Vioxx, but even that has only been linked to a few tens of thousands of deaths.
Like I said, they could do a lot more with food and a hell of a lot more with dietary supplements (which they can't meaningfully regulate under current laws), but the drugs issues aren't as bad as you say.
And even with Vioxx, IIRC, the issue was administering the drug for far longer than originally intended (under a year versus years and years). While the number of deaths was a statistical estimate only. "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) estimates that Vioxx may have contributed to 27,785 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths between 1999 and 2003" based on a sample patient review.