Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Charley Hooper and David Henderson wisely make the case against the absurd 1962 Kefauver-Harris amendment that FDA approval be given, not to drugs that are proven merely to be “safe,” but only to those that are proven to be both “safe and effective.” A slice:

Further, the Kefauver-Harris Amendments dramatically increased the time and cost of getting new drugs approved. Evidence provided by University of Chicago economist Sam Peltzman suggests that the number of new drugs approved dropped by 60% in the decade following the law change. We have fewer ineffective drugs, but also far fewer effective ones than we could have had.

Also rightly critical of the FDA is my intrepid Mercatus Center colleague Veronique de Rugy.

GMU Econ alum Ryan Young and CEI are among those who are on the job trying to rid the land of the pestilence of regulations that are harmful to Americans’ health.

T. Norman Van Cott makes clear that economic prosperity is impossible without production.

John O. McGinnis explains the perils of “second-best” arguments.

George Selgin busts the latest manifestation of what can be politely and generously described as darned lunatic notions of monetary policy.


Add a Comment    Share Share    Print    Email

Previous post:

Next post: