Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

writingruxandrabio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 192 posts

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#61

Post by c0d3rPrimate »

messe wrote: post #18
mystraline wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they were fighting for half the population, and they demonstrably lost. We now have pre-1975 law, including horrific laws like Texas creating task forces hunting out women with miscarriages and abortions in other states. They could have made the 'umbrella' of what they were fighting for cover 100% of the population. They didn't. We're all worse for it.

> They could have made the 'umbrella' of what they were fighting for cover 100% of the population [...] They didn't. We're all worse for it. Other people could have stood by them and fought for those rights too. You're blaming the wrong people. Regardless of your intentions, you're not coming across well. I'd urge you to try reframing this, as you're not going to win many supporters outside of the alt-right pipeline…

[dead]

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#62

Post by pixl97 »

saulpw wrote: post #60
pixl97 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To play the devils advocate, in places with low bureaucracy most of the risk taken is not innovation. It's just risk that leads to the death of others. Buildings with shitty concrete with too little rebar in it. Electrical wiring that will kill you. Improper foundations and such. At the end of the day there is no simple answer here. It's no different than the talks about AI that dominate HN these days. You can build…

The devil doesn't need any more advocates.

Evidently the construct of the devil does because humanity can help but setup complex situations that require a balanced approach rather than only looking at things one way.

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#63

Post by pie_flavor »

BigTTYGothGF wrote: post #51

The usual line is "the regulations are written in blood", and it's a cliche because it's true.

No, it's a cliche because it's false and/or just rephrased alarmism. Most regulations are changes made to solve no problem, simply because someone thought it was a good idea, or because they were vaguely related to a Current Thing, and then persisted because undoing any decision is organizationally extremely hard and nobody cared enough. 'Written in blood' is a great catchphrase for eliminating any discussion of cost-benefit tradeoffs, and the lives that could have been saved but for inaction by default.

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#64

Post by panzagl »

peyton wrote: post #40
panzagl wrote: post #30

> More and more promising treatments are accumulating in the pipeline, fueled by an explosion of new therapeutic modalities, ranging from mRNA to better peptides and more recently, by AI. If the pipeline is backed up you put a bigger pipe in place, not get rid of it and hope some of the resulting flood goes where you want.

It’s less of a pipeline and more like a rocket engine. The exhaust gas (clinical data) spins the pump. We’ve put restrictors on that flow, and it’s taking a lot of fuel to get off the ground.

Rockets with unrestricted flow are called bombs.

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#65

Post by saulpw »

pixl97 wrote: post #62
saulpw wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The devil doesn't need any more advocates.

Evidently the construct of the devil does because humanity can help but setup complex situations that require a balanced approach rather than only looking at things one way.

In that case, you can explain the nuance and offer a more balanced viewpoint, without invoking the devil as an accountability sink. Your words should stand on their own merits. (To be fair, you did this! I'm just saying you shouldn't preface your words with a trite phrase that signals you'll be lobbing cheap logic over the wall and disavowing responsibility for your words if the logic proves faulty.)

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#66

Post by just13ducks »

There’s a lot to be said about the seemingly overbearing nature of the majority of FDA/ISO standards that result in the mass amount of hurdles that need to be jumped before a treatment is available, but that’s mainly due to institutional trauma from past events (thalidomide, primarily) as well as the fact that treatments are not simply binary. The options are not just “does not work” and “makes patient better,” there’s also “makes the problem worse.” These additional tests and trials are to catch and prevent adverse effects just as much as they are to ensure the drug or treatment actually works.

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#69

Post by missedthecue »

just13ducks wrote: post #66

There’s a lot to be said about the seemingly overbearing nature of the majority of FDA/ISO standards that result in the mass amount of hurdles that need to be jumped before a treatment is available, but that’s mainly due to institutional trauma from past events (thalidomide, primarily) as well as the fact that treatments are not simply binary. The options are not just “does not work” and “makes patient better,” there…

During covid, the FDA testified to congress that they were putting the vaccines on an approval fast track that would not reduce safety or efficacy. Why is this not the standard approval track?

Re: The bureaucracy blocking the chance at a cure

#70

Post by adw »

missedthecue wrote: post #69
just13ducks wrote: post #66

There’s a lot to be said about the seemingly overbearing nature of the majority of FDA/ISO standards that result in the mass amount of hurdles that need to be jumped before a treatment is available, but that’s mainly due to institutional trauma from past events (thalidomide, primarily) as well as the fact that treatments are not simply binary. The options are not just “does not work” and “makes patient better,” there…

During covid, the FDA testified to congress that they were putting the vaccines on an approval fast track that would not reduce safety or efficacy. Why is this not the standard approval track?

Because it's inordinately more expensive.

We're computer people, so we have a good analogy here; the COVID vaccine did speculative branch prediction. They basically operated _as if_ they would get approval at all stages where they could, parallelizing much more of the process at the cost of a _very_ expensive branch fail if something went wrong.

Post reply on HN