X-Message-Number: 547.2
To:
Message-Subject: patent medicines/FDA
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 91 1:55:06 PST
From: Eli Brandt <>
I am currently researching the history of the patent medicine industry in
the US (uof course, most of the literature is heavily regulatory). This
would be an opportune time to work in some slams at the good ol' Federal
Death Administration. Does anybody have 1) a reasonable history of the LEF
screwage, and/or 2) other anti-social behavior which the FDA is or has been
engaged in, preferable with some kind of references?
Oh, and has anybody seen a decent cost/benefit analysis of the FDA? I've
seen much speculation on development lag vs. protecting-the-idiot-consumer,
but no hard numbers. Or whatever the equivalent is in the social sciences.
Eli
To:
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 91 11:26:03 CST
From: (Tom W. Bell)
Message-Subject: Evidence against FDA
>...has anybody seen a decent cost/benefit analysis of the FDA?
>Eli
Here's something you may find useful: in "A Review of the Record,"
REGULATION, (November/December 1986): 25-34, the author John F. Morrall
III compares 44 proposed, final, or rejected federal rules aimed at
reducing risks of death by looking to their costs per life saved. He puts
his results in a table on p 30. The only FDA regulation to appear on the
list appears far down the list (it WAS finalized and regulates DES in
cattlefeed). It has the WORST cost/benefit ratios of ANY of the finalized
rules he reviews. All those with lower such ratios (and many with better
ones) were wisely rejected (with the exception of a few still under
consideration at the time he wrote the article).
Morrall estimates that this FDA regulation saves 68 lives per annum at a
cost of $132,000,000/life. Is this a good trade-off? Morrall cites 16
careful studies estimating individual willingness to pay for risk
reduction. "The estimates vary from about $400,000 to about $9.7 million
per life saved, with a mean estimate of $3.3 million and a median estimate
of $1.7 million." Id at 34. This indicates that the FDA's regulations
diverge from individual preferences by a couple of orders of magnitude.
This isn't to say that the FDA hasn't proposed dumber things. It once
tried to ban the cosmetic coloring Orange No. 17 to avert a calculated risk
of death of 1 in 10 billion. The regulation was projected to save one life
in 2,000 years. Id at 29.
--TWB
Tom W. Bell
To:
From: more% (Max More)
Message-Subject: FDA & Saul Kent in LONGEVITY
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 91 15:08:52 PST
The November 1991 issue of Longevity has a reasonable article on Saul Kent's
struggle with the FDA. They quote both sides, but Saul comes out looking
good IMO.
The Fascist Death Administrators won't be satisfied until all health
food stores, drug companies, and publishers of information on drugs and
nutrients have been nationalized and put under the FDA's monopoly control.
Max More
To:
From: more% (Max More)
Message-Subject: Re: Costs of the FDA
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 91 15:25:12 PST
> Death Administration. Does anybody have 1) a reasonable history of the LEF
> screwage, and/or 2) other anti-social behavior which the FDA is or has been
> engaged in, preferable with some kind of references?
>
> Oh, and has anybody seen a decent cost/benefit analysis of the FDA? I've
>
> Eli
>
One good source is Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw's Life Extension,
pp.564-598. They quote a sizable chunk of the study by economist
Sam Peltzmann, "Regulation of Pharmaceutical Innovation" (American
Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1974). Also see ch.7 of
Free to Choose by Milton and Rose Friedman.
The Peltzman study can also be found in Regulating New Drugs,
R.L. Landau, ed., (University of Chicago for Policy Studies, Chicago, Illinois)
and in the Journal of Political Economy, pp.1049-1091, Sept-Oct 1973.
Max More
To:
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 91 7:20:28 GMT
From:
The latest issue of Reason magazine has a good article on the current head
of the FDA, characterizing him as an Elliot Ness type - a stickler for the
law, prohibitionist, careerist, etc. It might be good ammo for protesting
the imprisonment of the LEF founders. Fight the good fight!
Tim Starr
To:
Date: 17 Nov 91 22:50:40 EST
From: "Russell E. Whitaker" <>
Message-Subject: I sent *my* letter...
18 Nov 371
I've just sent *my* letter to the U.S. Attorney's office in
Florida. I sent a heavily modified version of the letter
Kevin Brown sent, CRYOMSG 547.1.
If anyone else uses that letter, make note of this:
1.) The date should be changed.
2.) Change "The Foundation" to "the Foundation"
3.) Tone down the letter slightly; make it a little less
personal. You'll know where to do that if you read a
raw copy.
4.) I personally find it a little offensive to address the
Att'y as "Dear Mr. Lehtinen", especially where a
direct "Mr. Lehtinen" would suffice.
I'm sending mine CompuServe fax now, so that it will be waiting on
the fax machine of Lehtinen's office when he arrives for work
this morning (it's 4:00 A.M. here in London). Anyone else here
have trouble getting immediate access to a fax machine?
If so, and you can get your letter by email to me within a few
hours, I will forward the letter on my CIS account, free to you.
Take me up on my offer: it costs me $0.75/page, and I won't offer
again. Let's get those letters out!
Russell E. Whitaker
Communications Editor
EXTROPY: The Journal of Transhumanist Thought
Distribution:
Extropians >INTERNET:
Alcor >INTERNET:
To:
From: more% (Max More)
Message-Subject: Saul released but in trouble
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 91 23:12:01 PST
Update: Apparently Saul made bail and is now free. However, all the
work is still to be done. Just don't include a "Free Saul and Bill" in your
letters!
Max
To:
From: (David Lubkin)
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 91 13:47:26 EST
Message-Subject: FDA
I forwarded Keith's message about LEF/FDA to some local mailing lists,
and now some locals are attacking his statements about the FDA. I'd like
to substantiate his claims that the FDA is a bunch of bullies that have
caused millions to die needlessly, but I'm having trouble finding any of
the dozens of pieces I've read on the subject (moving will do that to
you). Does anyone have anything on line they can send me -- articles,
postings, or bibliographies/references ? I'm especially looking for a
piece about how thalidomide was a good drug that should never have been
banned, just kept away from pregnant women. Two people specifically cited
thalidomide as an example of how wonderful the FDA is.
-- David.
-------
To:
Message-Subject: Re: FDA
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 91 23:57:25 PST
From: Eli Brandt <>
> I forwarded Keith's message about LEF/FDA to some local mailing lists,
> and now some locals are attacking his statements about the FDA. I'd like
The obvious argumentative tactic would be to postulate a "non-binding" FDA.
While this is suboptimal to an anarchist, it forces your opponents to
retreat into naked paternalism, without bringing things like the *market*
into the discussion.
> postings, or bibliographies/references ? I'm especially looking for a
> piece about how thalidomide was a good drug that should never have been
> banned, just kept away from pregnant women. Two people specifically cited
> thalidomide as an example of how wonderful the FDA is.
You *are* in luck. While rummaging through some of the references that
people here gave me (I'll summarize in a week or two if there's interest),
I ran across a reference to thalidomide. Seems it's useful in the treatment
of leprosy, as well as being a possibly-useful tranquilizer. Look in
_Regulation_, Nov/Dec '86, in the article before the one containing page 30.
If you can't find this, e-mail me and I'lltrack it down again.
> -- David.
>
Eli
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=547.2