Who Should Decide What New Drugs You Take?
ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, is very serious. It is virtually a diagnosis of terminal illness. As such, life insurance underwriters typically do not make offers. A few guaranteed-issue products that are good for burial money could be available in some states. In other instances, the patient might be eligible for a group term product with no underwriting. That is about it for life insurance options.
It is one of those diseases that has caught our attention because of its namesake, Lou Gehrig. It is the subject of continuous scientific inquiry to come up with treatments that can prolong survival, and maybe even cure it.
The federal government asserts control over what new medications enter the marketplace. They have their reasons for allowing and not allowing drugs into our hands. It unfortunately cannot be said that every decision they make is in the best interest of the public. Isn’t it in the nature of a bureaucracy to cover itself whenever possible?
Such a mentality could deprive people of treatments that can make them better. They could live longer, they could live healthier – and they could buy life insurance. If you have a good, sound reason to believe a drug would help you, should the government stop you from buying it?
Walter E Williams is a professor of economics and a political commentator. He writes about the FDA holding up clinical trials that have considerable promise for people with ALS. My reading of his article is that the FDA really has no good reason to prevent this. Take a look at what he says. What do you think?