Question

Several states have passed “right to try” legislation that allows terminally ill people access to treatments that have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Those in favor argue that those who are terminally ill have very little to lose and a lot to gain from these treatments. What is the BEST argument AGAINST these laws?

Answer 1

Right-to-try laws are U.S. state laws and a federal law that were created with the intent of allowing terminally ill patients access to experimental therapies (drugs, biologics, devices) that have completed Phase I testing but have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Prior to the passage of right to try laws, patients needed FDA approval to use experimental drugs. As of 2018, 41 U.S. states had passed right to try laws. The value of these laws was questioned on multiple grounds, including the fact that pharmaceutical manufacturers would have no obligation to provide the therapies being sought.[1] A federal right to try law was passed in May 2018. Since the signing of the bill thousands of patients have been able to use the experimental therapies. According to Scott Gottlieb, who served as commissioner of the FDA under President Donald Trump, the FDA had already approved 99% of patient requests for access to experimental drugs, either immediately over the phone or within a few days, prior to the passage of right to try legislation