|
Women's Enews (USA), June 9, 2004
OP ED: Heads Should Roll at
FDA
BYLINE: Louise Slaughter - WeNews commentator
(WOMENSENEWS)--In yet another example of the
Bush administration playing politics with health
care, the U.S Food and Drug Administration
last month rejected an application by Barr
Laboratories to allow its emergency contraceptive,
Plan B, to be sold over the counter without
a prescription.
Allowing women greater access to emergency contraception
could cut the unintended pregnancy rate in
half and drastically reduce the number of abortions
performed in this nation. These sound like
goals that everyone can agree on, Democrat
and Republican alike. Yet the FDA caved to
right-wing ideologues and denied women over
the counter access to emergency contraception.
The FDA's own scientific advisory panels and
staff had overwhelmingly recommended that this
drug be made available to American women over-the-counter.
They had determined that the scientific facts
irrefutably show that this drug is a safe,
effective way for women to prevent unintended
pregnancy. But the FDA went ahead and blocked
over the counter sales, claiming that there
was not enough information about its safety
for young women.
Inappropriate Politics
There have been serious allegations that what
should have been a science-based decision was
influenced by inappropriate political considerations.
Two of the members of one of the advisory committees
who considered this application, Dr. Michael
F. Greene and Dr. Alastair Wood, published
an editorial in the New England Journal of
Medicine in April in response to the FDA's
announcement that it was delaying its decision
on whether to make Plan B available over-the-counter.
In that commentary, these distinguished scientists
said the FDA's move "suggests that the
FDA's decision-making process is being influenced
by political considerations."
In that same editorial, the authors went on to
say that the "data overwhelmingly demonstrate
that emergency contraception is safe and effective
when available without a prescription."
They also shot down the arguments that better
access to the medication will boost promiscuity
or other risky behavior, saying that "the
evidence shows that the availability of emergency
contraception does not result in a change in
the usual behavior or contraceptive practices
of the women who are its potential users. A
treatment for any other condition, from hangnail
to headache to heart disease, with a similar
record of safety and efficacy would be approved
quickly."
The two doctors also said that allowing political
interference with what should be a science-based
decision could undermine public confidence
in the drug approval process.
This concern was echoed by Vivian M. Dickerson,
president of the American College of Obstetricians
and Gynecologists, who said the agency's action
"is a tragedy for American women and a
dark stain on the reputation of an evidence-based
agency like the FDA."
Irregular Decision
Even FDA officials admit that this decision was
irregular. According to The New York Times,
Dr. Steven Galson, acting director of the FDA's
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and
the person who signed the "not-approvable"
letter, said, "I am not trying to convey
this decision as being common or usual."
Former FDA officials "could not remember
another instance in which Dr. Galson - . .
. or any of his predecessors had overruled
both an advisory committee and staff recommendations."
As a scientist myself, I find it extremely troubling
that the FDA so readily ignored the scientific
facts about Plan B. The integrity of the FDA
drug approval system, and of public confidence
in the safety and efficacy of the drugs FDA
approves, depends on these decisions being
free from political influence. American women--indeed,
all Americans--trust the FDA to make the best
decisions possible with respect to their health.
That is why, as Democratic co-chair of the Congressional
Pro-Choice Caucus and the Congressional Caucus
for Women's Issues, I have called on President
Bush to request the resignations of FDA Acting
Commissioner Lester Crawford and Dr. Steve
Galson. They must be held accountable for this
appalling decision that so clearly goes against
the scientific data. Along with Rep. Henry
Waxman, I also initiated a letter signed by
27 of our colleagues requesting that the General
Accounting Office conduct an investigation
into the way this decision was made.
Americans must be able to trust that the federal
agency responsible for giving them access to
miraculous drugs will leave politics out of
decisions that can so profoundly affect their
health. We cannot allow future FDA decisions
to be jeopardized by partisanship.
Louise M. Slaughter, a microbiologist with
a master's degree in Public Health, serves
as U.S. Representative from the 28th Congressional
District of New York.
For more information:
HealthDayNews-- - "FDA Adds New Hurdle to
'Morning-After' Pill": - http://yalenewhavenhealth.org/healthnews/healthday/040507HD518837.htm
<< Womens Enews -- 6/9/04 >>
FAIR USE NOTICE
This
site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available in
our efforts to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights,
economic, democracy, scientific, and social
justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes
a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the
US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on
this site is distributed without profit
to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information
for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material
from this site for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.
|