A nice example of bought politicans endandering health

[Bill Mattocks]

I think the news agencies are glossing over the most important part of this story:

http://www.app.com/article/20101015...-rescind-approval-of-N-J-maker-s-knee-implant

FDA to rescind approval of N.J. maker's knee implant

To rescind approval for N.J. maker's device

By KEVIN PENTON • STAFF WRITER • October 15, 2010

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said Friday it erroneously approved a knee-implant device two years ago after bowing to "extreme" pressure from four members of Congress from New Jersey.


...
Four New Jersey Democrats — Reps. Frank Pallone Jr. and Steve R. Rothman and Sens. Robert Menendez and Frank R. Lautenberg — appealed to the FDA on ReGen's behalf during the agency's review of the product, according to accounts last year from Rothman and spokesmen for the three others.Whether to their individual campaign chests or to related political action committees, ReGen executives contributed a total of $24,000 to the four lawmakers from December 2007 to October 2008 — $11,300 to Rothman, $7,100 to Menendez, $3,300 to Pallone and $2,300 to Lautenberg, according to Federal Election Commission records.
Starting in December 2007, FDA officials considering ReGen's application began receiving congressional inquiries that were "highly unusual" for their persistence and for their interest in specific, substantive aspects of the device's review, according to a September 2009 report by the FDA.
"The director of FDA's Office of Legislation described the pressure from the (Capitol) Hill as the most extreme he had seen," according to the report, "and the agency's acquiescence to (ReGen's) demands for access to the commissioner and other officials in the commissioner's office as unprecedented in his experience."

If you read the entire story, it becomes clear that the doctors and scientists who objected to the approval of this device were shuttled off to the side, their objections overruled by administrators. They weren't even allowed to present their objections at the final approval meetings.

And most news stories about this incident DO NOT MENTION the names of the Congressmen involved - they just say "undue political pressure." It makes me want to puke.

And the fact that they are Democrats? I don't think that matters a bit. I'd be every bit as upset if they were Republicans or Independents, and I'm sure that all Congresspersons are just as crooked as these four are. I'm not pointing fingers at Democrats, I'm pointing fingers at crooks.

Imagine that - an elected member of Congress takes money from a medical company, puts huge pressure on the FDA to get the device approved, and then what if people die because of it? No big deal. I'll bet there won't be any investigations of wrongdoing. I'll bet the FBI doesn't get involved. I'll bet that there won't even be an Ethics Committee investigation. No, it will be ignored. Business as usual. Take our vote and sell us down the river. Thanks, Congress. I'm voting against EVERY SINGLE INCUMBENT this time around. All of 'em are crooks, they ALL need to go - to prison.

 

[Cryozombie]

Not to mention It makes one want to scrutinize any possible use of a Regen product in their health care, knowing that they clearly put profit before safety.

 

[Makalakumu]

Can we trust these agencies anymore? How will these events affect your decisions in regards to health care?

 

[WC_lun]

Public officials like this should be prosecuted. Your right though, there probably will be no accountability

I don't know if we can really trust the agencies to perform thier work without undo influence from paid for politicians. I do know, I'd rather they be there than completely trusting to the better nature of the product manufacturors.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Nutrasweet was fast tracked through. Burns holes in your brain, but it's in a crap load of sugar free stuff. Splenda destroys your kidneys but it too was fast tracked and is in almost everything else. HFCS causes all sorts of health issues, but the answer isn't to remove it, but change it's name to "corn sugar".

I trust the FDA, Congress, etc about as much as I trust an irate pitbull with a hair trigger to not eat me.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Public officials like this should be prosecuted. Your right though, there probably will be no accountability

I don't know if we can really trust the agencies to perform thier work without undo influence from paid for politicians. I do know, I'd rather they be there than completely trusting to the better nature of the product manufacturors.

Or you can trust an NGO, Underwriters Laboratory for instance, to certify things for safety. They seem to do a perfectly acceptable job.

And all without being a part of the government. Hm, imagine that.

 

[Makalakumu]

Or you can trust an NGO, Underwriters Laboratory for instance, to certify things for safety. They seem to do a perfectly acceptable job.

And all without being a part of the government. Hm, imagine that.

I've been wondering how the free market could be used as a check for accountability. Imagine we had private agencies to act as watchdogs. If they make a mistake, people would then shift their business to another agency. However, the price of mistakes is extremely high...often it is life or death.

Would a free market system essentially create a situation where people would have to die in order for there to be accountability? Is this unavoidable and preferable because our current system is so corrupt? Or is there a way that government could actually do this job?

We're essentially talking about fraud, so this could be considered something that the government could manage.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Or you can trust an NGO, Underwriters Laboratory for instance, to certify things for safety. They seem to do a perfectly acceptable job.

And all without being a part of the government. Hm, imagine that.

Like Standard & Poors and Moodys did with bonds? Yes, terrific, objective, unbiased analysis. Seems to me that where there's money, there's corruption; unless there is a sure and certain axe ready to fall on the necks of people and companies who put public health, safety, or savings at risk to line their own pockets.

 

[Makalakumu]

Like Standard & Poors and Moodys did with bonds? Yes, terrific, objective, unbiased analysis. Seems to me that where there's money, there's corruption; unless there is a sure and certain axe ready to fall on the necks of people and companies who put public health, safety, or savings at risk to line their own pockets.

Conflicts of interest exist in public and private agencies.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Conflicts of interest exist in public and private agencies.

Agreed. Just pointing out that being a government agency doesn't make it automatically corrupt, and being a private agency doesn't make it automatically beyond corruption. Both are quite capable of being undermined and corrupted, because people are corruptible.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Like Standard & Poors and Moodys did with bonds? Yes, terrific, objective, unbiased analysis. Seems to me that where there's money, there's corruption; unless there is a sure and certain axe ready to fall on the necks of people and companies who put public health, safety, or savings at risk to line their own pockets.

There are a few very significant difference though.

You can't sue the federal government, , unless they let you that is. But, you can sue a non-governmental organization for its corruption.

Not only that, but the government can set the rules in its favor which have the force of the U.S. military and police behind it to enforce it's corrupt laws, to which a citizen will have no ability to go to for it's grievences. Not so with an NGO.

And yes, you can set up laws to put such corrupt civilians in jail, which has been done. You show me where a politician has gone to jail for any of their corruptions lately, at least one that hasn't been politically motivated.

 

[Carol]

Government involvement can also be limiting.

Most countries aren't too fond of the American government trying to tell them what to do. NGOs are more successful in crossing international boundaries.

Underwriters Labs, for example, is not just restricted to the US. It is international in scope. The United States and Canada use the same electrical standards and share a grid. Doesn't it make sense that a toaster that is unsafe in the United States would also be unsafe in Canada? Or insert Spain and Portugal. Or Colombia and Ecuador. And so on....

 

[Makalakumu]

Agreed. Just pointing out that being a government agency doesn't make it automatically corrupt, and being a private agency doesn't make it automatically beyond corruption. Both are quite capable of being undermined and corrupted, because people are corruptible.

Maybe the problem isn't public vs. private. People who are corrupt should be brought before a civil or criminal court and held responsible. How many of these people or how many of the people at Moody's or S&P have been brought in front of a judge? Corruption is a lever that can be applied anywhere and the only bulwark we have against it is the rule of law. If we have no law and/or the judicial system has failed or is also corrupt, it doesn't matter who is supposed to be overlooking things.

Thoughts?

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Maybe the problem isn't public vs. private. People who are corrupt should be brought before a civil or criminal court and held responsible. How many of these people or how many of the people at Moody's or S&P have been brought in front of a judge? Corruption is a lever that can be applied anywhere and the only bulwark we have against it is the rule of law. If we have no law and/or the judicial system has failed or is also corrupt, it doesn't matter who is supposed to be overlooking things.

Thoughts?

Very true. But one of the key factors, I believe, is the structure of the system itself. Remember, judges are dependent upon their future earnings and positions from the legislators, those that make the laws and regulations. There is no benefit from a life-time appointee to the federal judicial bench to go against the legislature. In other words the checks and balances exist within the structure and ruling bodies themselves. It's kind of like when people complain about how police officers investigate themselves when it comes to officer involved shootings. There is an inherent bias towards siding in their favor (absent the furtherance of trying to score political points, a further corrupting behavior).

Now, in the private sector, there is the company's reputation, it's ability to further it's goals (as groups such as UL are often non-profit organizations). If they lose their reputation, then the people can go to another like organization, as well as sue for damages and impose criminal penalties. You can't go to another government.

I liken this to how police agencies can hold citizens essentially hostage. If an agency decides not to pursue a criminal investigation, the citizens have no one else to turn to, except for the outside chance of making it a federal case. And that depends on if the federal agency even wants to.