This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (8)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Louis Lasagna, MD; William M. Wardell, MD, PhD

JAMA. 1975;232(2):141-142.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

SINCE it was begun in 1907, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has often been the center of controversy. Recent scandals in the executive branch of the government have reminded us that public officials are not above either the law or the public they are supposed to serve. It is therefore appropriate that the FDA be responsive to public concerns, and be held accountable when criticism erupts, be it from consumerists, the medical profession, the drug industry, or the Congress. Still, it is also crucial that a regulatory agency not become so embroiled in defensive maneuvers that it loses its ability to serve the public properly.

During the last decade, the FDA has been accused both of overregulation and underregulation. Such a situation is not as paradoxical as it might seem. On the one hand, the FDA might be considered culpable if it fails to police drug manufacturers and allows . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, The University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, The University of Rochester School of Medicine, 260 Crittenden Blvd, Rochester, NY 14642 (Dr. Lasagna).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?