BPA and the FDA
A new study suggests that children exposed to bisphenol A (BPA) may be hyperactive.
"[E]ven the authors — who apparently really wanted to find something condemning — note that 'the clinical relevance of these findings is unclear at this point,' and the potential 'benefits' of reducing exposure to BPA-containing food packaging and other products is also 'unclear.' The only real conclusion the authors could draw was that 'findings presented here warrant additional research' — a plea found in most research articles. It might as well say: 'mail the check to…' But even the need for more research should be questioned. BPA is one of the most studied chemicals and the body of research warrants little concern. See CEI’s study on the topic. Research dollars wold probably be better spent elsewhere."
The Prescription Drug User Fee Act allows the FDA to charge pharmaceutical companies for the regulatory process.
"These fees now account for about a quarter of FDA’s total budget, and close to two-thirds of the drug and biologics regulation budget, which means that Congress views reauthorization as a 'must pass' bill. So, every five years since PDUFA was first enacted in 1992, Congress has seen reauthorization as an opportunity to force through certain other FDA regulatory measures that may or may not be able to pass on their own. Usually, Congress just lards on loads of additional regulatory hurdles. But, sometimes, such as in 1997′s FDA Modernization Act, some of these changes are actually moderately positive."