Reason.tv presents the Bud Bowl of a new generation!

Two drinks, one field, and numerous mixtures of alcohol and caffeine that “cause” young people to engage in risky behavior.

It’s The Battle of the Binge: Buzz Bowl I

Who will come out on top? Four Loko? Joose? Or will it be Senator Schumer (D-NY) and the FDA?

(more…)

Last week, we discussed the rigged game of three-card monte that the FDA is trying to run over unsuspecting patients.  The game is rigged.  If government is allowed to arbitrarily shift from objective data driven safety focused approval to subjective cost based standards for drug approvals — as the appears to be doing in the case of Avastin — patients will always lose.

As in any game of three-card monte — the shills come into play.  In the card game on the streets, the shills pose as actual participants who make the game look simple goading unsuspecting observers to bet money who always lose.  The shills work with the dealers.

In the case of the FDA — the shills were the Associated Press and TalkingPointsMemo.com.  The FDA changed the rules so that price would be a determining factor in the approval process of drugs and the shills stepped in to belittle and goad anyone who didn’t play the game the way the dealers wanted.

Sen. Vitter decided to blow the whistle on the game and yet other shill stepped in.  This time it is another liberal website ThinkProgress.com.

Jumping on the bias claim that Vitter had likened the FDA to a death panel, the group makes the false claim that “Avastin is more likely to harm cancer patients than to help them.”  Patently false.  If ThinkProgress didn’t have a Pavlovian response every time a Republican issued a press release, they would have seen that the article they linked to made no mention of any harm to cancer patients from taking the drug.

Quite the opposite is true.  Patients who take the drug extend their lives.  The only negative side effects motivating bureaucrats in this decision are the ones in their pockets. They are trying to make a subjective determination that the price of the drug outweighs its benefits.  In other words, the FDA is trying to factor in cost of the drugs in whether it should be “de-labeled.”

(more…)