This is interesting stuff, Vaughn.
I suppose you may be interpreting my comments as dismissive. Not at all.
Let me restate:
IF Kerry can achieve his campaign promise, I agree with you that advertising Pennsaid would have a benefit. Not as much of a benefit as if Pennsaid were FDA-approved, but still, we'd get sales we don't have now. You're right.
That said, I think any attempt by Kerry to implement such a promise would be fought tooth-and-nail - by the FDA and American drug companies.
Even a President with a huge mandate (and Kerry's looks like it will be small, at best) starts running into trouble when he challenges powerful entrenched special interests - and the US pharmaceutical industry is one of the biggest.
It would require changes to legislation, and regulations. Kerry would problably need to replace the head of the FDA, because I don't believe the incumbent would support the proposition.
It would be lobbied fiercely, and fought in the House and the Senate. As far as Pennsaid (in particular) goes, lobbying and scare tactics might even go so far as to bring back some of the anti-DMSO hobgoblins from the 60's. For all "foreign" drugs not approved by the FDA, there would be extensive negative advertising.
Granted, people would vote for drugs with their pocketbook, but there would be a huge disinformation campaign.
It would be a tremendous fight, with an unpredictable result. If it passed at all, the bill would probably be quite watered-down.
So I hope you understand that I'm not critical of the concept, or completely negative about possible benefits. The bill would be very popular, and would be a great step in the right direction. The FDA and the US pharmaceutical industry need shaking up, from the standpoint of the American consumer.
However, political cynicism that makes me hope for FDA approval, in preference to the likely outcome of Kerry achieving his campaign promise.
Regards,
Jim |
