Progressive Reforms - Essay Example

Progressively Reforming the FDA: A Case of Groundless Beliefs and Assumptions? Beliefs are the ideas people make about others, their own selves, and the world. Beliefs are also about how people view reality and what thus can be expected as the probable result that will come out from their actions. Assumptions, in a similar vein, influence the way people view reality, their actions, and the structure of their relationships. Therefore, basically, beliefs and assumptions influence actions. History is replete with examples of how actions and behaviors were influenced by assumptions and beliefs.

Some were simple superstitions, while others have resulted in more severe outcomes. Ancient medicine, for instance, was normally a mishmash of science, religion, and pagan. People suffering from the bubonic plague were instructed to atone or seek forgiveness for their transgressions (Christensen 2004). Apparently, this failed to get rid of the plague. Another case in point is the medieval doctors who assumed that majority of human maladies were the outcome of excessive volume of body fluid; hence, to ‘medicate’ the ill they practiced ‘venesection’, or the process of removing glut body fluid by extracting substantial amounts of blood from the body (Christensen 2004).

But unfortunately, to no avail. In the contemporary period, these kinds of assumptions and beliefs continue to influence the field of medicine, especially, at this point, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA has the instruments and legally sanctioned power to control the overall effectiveness and safety of drugs. The intricacies of reforming the drug approval procedure of the FDA are underlined by conflicts between private manufacturers of drugs and the FDA about the objectives and rationales that should dominate in carrying out the review procedure (Dohrman 2005).

Apparently, the drug manufacturers and FDA have different beliefs and assumptions about the structure of the approval procedure. Drug manufacturers believe that the process of approval is unduly drawn out for them to generate revenue corresponding to the extensive financial resources, effort, and time put in to produce a drug. On the contrary, the FDA believes that it should sustain its main role of guaranteeing that drugs promoted to end users are effectual and safe, and this procedure naturally requires significant amount of time for reassessment.

These conflicting beliefs and assumptions are the reason why the FDA is now facing a progressive reform. It is widely assumed that there are dangers in delaying drugs. It is believed that when FDA commits errors, large portions of the population die. It is also assumed that when it acts unreasonably slow, many people die (Dohrman 2005). These casualties are not spectacular, and an untrained mind cannot constantly discern a fatality that is caused by the slow processing of FDA. There is scarce empirical evidence on casualties brought about by delays in the review and approval processes of FDA (Dohrman 2005).

The progressive reform is also proposed because it is broadly believed that the FDA is careless and sluggish. The analysis emphasizes the ‘assumed’ crucial need to restructure the drug approval procedure of the FDA. The agency has previously undertaken thorough investigations concerning its contribution to the Vioxx issue. It is also likely to endure further inspections which would provide Congress a more ‘accurate’ knowledge, and not only unfounded beliefs and assumptions, of the general issues and difficulties with the FDA.

References Christensen, David. Putting Logic in Its Place: Formal Constraints on Rational Belief. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004. Dohrman, Amanda. “Rethinking and Restructuring the FDA Drug Approval Process in Light of the Vioxx Recall” Journal of Corporation Law 31.1 (2005): 203+