I think we have one of the best FDA commissioners that we have had in years and she still believes in ethics and doing the right thing.  In her commencement speech given at Einstein College of Medicine you can clearly hear that in her voice as she reminds doctors to always put the patient first and don’t cave in to unethical taunts that exist out there.  Today she says the FDA and what they do is a bargain and the cost to taxpayers pay about $8.00 a year for their services via taxes, so not a bad deal for all that they do.

FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg Delivers Commencement Address at Albert Einstein College of Medicine–Video

Sure the agency is not perfect and what agency is but they have had to scramble and punt quickly with all the technology changes that have hit them.  Just before Bush went out of office, before she came on board the FDA had investigators still writing up reports longhand on paper, so it’s come a long way and now devices that are mobile are there for approval which was not there 4 years ago, so a lot of shifting and changing by the agency.  They also have had much more to do with inspections with both drugs, devices and food too, some of it overseas.  Of course their budget needs are going to need to increase, numbers just tell you that.  We need both the NIH and FDA for sure. 

It will be interesting to see what comes of their proposed budget.  As a matter of fact I said by excise taxing and licensing the data sellers out there that would make more money available for both agencies.  I just read where Google has about $50 billion to invest in start up companies so they could afford a little tax for this good cause as they sell enough data for sure, one of the biggest and to know that the tax goes for medical and scientific research is not a bad thing at all.  Of course they have a lot of company, look at banks selling data as well as other companies and billions in flat straight cash profits are made this way, selling data.

One More Good Reason to Tax the Data Sellers– Create Additional Funding for the NIH and FDA From Sources That Otherwise Are Too Greedy to Share & Contribute

”Hey dude let’s crunch some numbers and see if we can come up with some analytics to sell” is sometimes how some of this comes across today as everyone is dogmatically going through their big data and there will some good stuff and also a lot of garbage too and only half of the analytics will prove to be a viable investment, an observation from some Australian bankers that I agree with all the way around.  I’m glad I’m not on the “snarky” side of Algo Duping by all means. 

So what a great way to finally do a service to US consumers with an excise tax and license for all those who profit in the billions with data selling, while the consumer gets a privacy policy that says nothing, government is bliss to how the intangible processes work and the best they come up with is was this “data seller lobbied” passage of the CISPA bill?  Would be great to have a federal site where all who sell disclose what kind of data they sell and to who. 

We get stuck as free labor to fix all the the errors made while banks and companies make billions on the sale to the highest bidder sometimes.  This way too it would take the pressure off the FDA on losing any budget dollars and they can continue with their work for the consumers to keep us safe.  Margaret Hamburg is right, the FDA is a bargain for the US consumers.  In addition they have worked hard and mighty on their Sentinel Program to store and gather data for research from various entities and a couple years ago all the insurers were going to donate data from claims as well as other entities and that has take a little back fall too as insurers like United found they could make money rather than donating and basically compete with the FDA.  

So again we have private industry working against the FDA in some data area as money calls but there are other areas to where private industry works with and does support the FDA too.  BD

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The head of the Food and Drug Administration asked Congress for more money on Thursday to address food safety, security and inspections, but said the agency is working hard to control costs and is a "true bargain" for Americans.

"We have made belt-tightening a priority," FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg told a Senate Appropriations subcommittee.

Among FDA's priorities are new food safety regulations, improving inspections of imported goods, and developing countermeasures against chemical and biological threats.

The FDA's proposed budget for 2014 would increase by $821 million to $4.7 billion over 2012, of which industry fees would account for $770 million, or 94 percent. The 2013 budget has not yet been finalized.



Post a Comment