首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Without fanfare or legislation, the government is orchestrating a quiet revolution in how it regulates new medicines. The revolu
Without fanfare or legislation, the government is orchestrating a quiet revolution in how it regulates new medicines. The revolu
admin
2013-11-29
51
问题
Without fanfare or legislation, the government is orchestrating a quiet revolution in how it regulates new medicines. The revolution is based on the idea that the sicker people are, the more freedom they should have to try drugs that are not yet fully tested. For fifty years government policy has been driven by another idea: the fear that insufficiently tested medicines could cause deaths and injuries. The urgent needs of people infected with HIV, the AIDS virus, and the possibility of meeting them with new drugs have created a compelling countervailing force to the continuing concern with safety. As a result, government rules and practices have begun to change. Each step is controversial. But the shift has already gone far beyond AIDS. New ways are emerging for very sick people to try some experimental drugs before they are marketed. People with the most serious forms of heart disease, cancer, emphysema, Alzheimer’ s or Parkinson’ s disease, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, diabetes, or other grave illnesses can request such drugs through their doctors and are likelier to get them than they would have been four years ago. "We’ve been too rigid in not making lifesaving drugs available to people who otherwise face certain death," says Representative Henry Waxman, of California, who heads the subcommittee that considers changes in drug-approval policies. "It’s true of AIDS, but it’s also true of cancer and other life- threatening diseases."
For the first time, desperate patients have become a potent political force for making new medicines available quickly. People with AIDS and their advocates, younger and angrier than most heart-disease or cancer patients, are drawing on two decades of gay activists’ success in organizing to get what they want from politicians. At times they found themselves allied with Reagan Administration deregulators, scientists, industry representatives, FDA staff members, and sympathetic members of Congress. They organized their own clinical trials and searched out promising drugs here and abroad. The result is a familiar Washington story: a crisis—AIDS—helped crystallize an informal coalition for reform.
AIDS gave new power to old complaints. As early as the 1970s the drug industry and some independent authorities worried that the Food and Do, g Administration’ s testing requirements were so demanding that new drugs were being unreasonably delayed. Beginning in 1972, several studies indicated that the United States had lost its lead in marketing new medicines and that breakthrough drugs—those that show new promise in treating serious or life-threatening diseases— had come to be available much sooner in other countries. Two high-level commissions urged the early release of breakthrough drugs. So did the Carter Administration, but the legislation it pro- posed died in Congress. Complaints were compounded by growing concern that "if we didn’t streamline policies, red tape wot, Id be an obstacle to the development of the biotechnology revolution," as Frank E. Young, who was the head of the FDA from 1984 to 1989, put it in an interview with me.
Young was a key figure in the overhaul of the FDA’s policies. A pioneer in biotechnology and a former dean of the University of Rochester’s medical school, he came to Washington with an agenda and headed the agency for five and a half years—longer than anyone else has since the 1960s. Young took the FDA job to help introduce new medicines created by biotechnology-- whose promise he had seen in his own gene-cloning lab--and to get experimental medicines to desperately iii people more quickly. He had seen people die waiting for new medicines because "they were in the wrong place at the wrong time," he said. That is now changing.
According to the passage, patients who are gravely ill ______.
选项
A、can get experimental drugs more quickly than ever before
B、are still unable to get experimental drugs because of government strict policies
C、can’t afford some expensive experimental drugs
D、refuse to be treated with experimental drugs
答案
A
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/4SOYFFFM
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
ThedomesticeconomyintheUnitedStatesexpandedinaremarkablyvigorousandsteadyfashion.Therevivalinconsumerconfiden
Themarveloustelephoneandtelevisionnetworkthathasnowenmeshedthewholeworld,makingallmenneighbors,cannotbeextend
InmostSouthAmericancountriesrailtransportisplaguedbyoperationalproblemsaswellasbyobsoleteequipment.
Although"namingrights"haveproliferatedinAmericanhighereducationforthepastseveraldecades,thephenomenonhasrecentl
BetweentheinventionofagricultureandthecommercialrevolutionthatmarkedtheendoftheMiddleAges,wealthandtechnology
Theincreaseinglobaltrademeansthatinternationalcompaniescannotaffordtomakecostlyadvertisingmistakesiftheywantt
Justiceinsocietymustincludebothafairtrialtotheaccusedandtheselectionofanappropriatepunishmentforthoseproven
AstothelostworldofEgypt,weknownearlyeverything______toknow.
TheInternetisaglobalnetworkthatconnectsothercomputernetworks,togetherwithsoftwareandprotocolsforcontrollingthe
随机试题
企业家在智能素质方面的显著特征是
与针对TD-Ag体液免疫应答有关的细胞有
提示右心室肥大的心电图表现是
PRP应检测MIC的药物是
隐血试验前3天,下列哪项食物可以选用
阅读材料,根据要求完成教学设计。“遗传信息的携带者——核酸”这节内容是新课程人教版高中生物教材必修一《分子与细胞》中第二章第三节的内容。在第二章中,教材重点从微观方面介绍了组成细胞的分子基础,主要介绍了组成细胞的元素和化合物,前面两节已经介绍了组
写出下列命题的否定和否命题.(1)所有能被6整除的数都能被3整除.(2)若a>2,b>2,则a+b>4.(3)存在实数x,使x>3.
阅读下面的文字,回答以下问题。从花粉到花生,让人类产生过敏变态反应的东西实在太多了。变态反应研究起步相对较晚,“变态反应”这一术语是儿科医生冯.皮尔凯和贝拉,锡克在20世纪初首先提出的。几乎同一时期,“过敏症”使生理学家查尔士.里歇声名远播并荣膺
Java程序的编译和执行模式包括2点,是【】和半解释。
MOROSE:
最新回复
(
0
)