FDA Get Out of the Way: Free to Choose Medicine

A petition by Tomorrow's Cures Today Foundation


FDA Approval

The non-profit Tomorrow's Cures Today Foundation aims to open patient access to innovative drugs and treatments in advance of Food and Drug Administration approval. The group has launched an online Change.org "Free to Choose Medicine" petition to Congress urging lawmakers to create a new drug development and testing system—one that would allow patients to try not-yet-approved drugs in a more open and transparent process. Approvals could even be speeded up based on the what's learned from treatment outcomes for patients who choose to use not-yet-approved drugs.

The Foundation outlines three principles for Free To Choose Medicine:

1. Some patients and their doctors only want medicines tested and approved in the traditional way, and for them nothing would change.  But others are not just willing, but eager to try not-yet-approved drugs.  They should not be denied the right to choose a viable medical treatment.  So, after safety testing is completed, patients should be free to choose a not-yet-approved drug if its developer is willing to make that drug available.  After all, patients, under care of their physicians, and with access to detailed reports describing all prior test results, are in a better position than government bureaucrats to decide whether the risks are worth bearing.

2. To ensure patients are fully informed, developers offering not-yet-approved drugs on the Free To Choose Medicine track would have to make all prior testing data available in a publicly accessible online database.  And every patient taking a Free To Choose drug would have to agree to let his or her doctor submit reports on an anonymous basis about their progress and any side effects.  This "observational data" collected from real world use would provide valuable information to patients and let them make informed and meaningful choices.


3. As more and more patients use Free To Choose drugs, the value of information available to other patients will grow.  Drugs that show severe side effects or little therapeutic benefit will be abandoned, although the data generated will be useful to drug developers.  But drugs with positive experience will become more popular and the amount of observational data will grow even more.  Technological advances in collecting and analyzing health data will make it possible for doctors and researchers to see who is benefiting the most from individual drugs and who is at higher risk.  This "big data" collection will be superior to what's collected in clinical trials, where researchers try to limit enrollment to patients who are all alike.  With enough patients, the FDA could even approve new drugs on the basis of observational data alone. 

In my article, "Building a 21st Century FDA," I endorsed Manhattan Institute senior fellow Avik Roy's proposal…

…to permit drug companies whose new medicines have passed Phase I and Phase II trials to market them conditionally to physicians and patients. "Under conditional approval, patients in most need can benefit from a new drug, and companies can generate a modest amount of revenue that can help fund Phase III trials for full approval," argues Roy. …

Given the rapid evolution of bioinformatics, it might one day be possible to roll out most new pharmaceuticals after the equivalent of Phase II trials. Since medical and prescribing records will be online, drug researchers could compare people who choose take conditionally approved new drugs with a population that does not, matched for various confounders such as age, other medical conditions, behaviors, etc. Essentially, the health care system itself might become a gigantic Phase III trial for new treatments.

Old-fashioned regulations are stalling progress and killing people.

Disclosure: I just signed the petition and made a modest donation to the Tomorrow's Cures Today Foundation.

NEXT: Ferguson City Manager Resigns, ISIS Attacks Ramadi, Lindsey Graham Goes Full Palpatine: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. What about the cure for de-evolving into Giant Horny Salamanders?

    1. If that’s a disease then I don’t want to be cured.

      1. I’m still laughing

        +1 horny toad

    2. Goddammit Winston stop talking about Voyager like it existed.

      1. It didn’t exist even within the show.

        Exhibit A: Season 2

        Count the number of times an episode’s punchline was, “Only none of this EVER HAPPENED – because alternate reality/dream sequences/ on the holodeck the whole time/temporal mechanics.”

        I protest most vehemently.

        1. Also. They kill off Harry Kim enough that he now qualifies as a main character on Supernatural.

          1. If only TNG had done that to Wesley. For real, of course.

            They really need to end Supernatural at this point.

            1. Aw cmon, they’re holding back the return of God for the biggest cliffhanger yet!

              1. Except God already returned in that shitty episode where Sam and Dean see a musical based on their lives.

                God, it’s like you guys don’t understand the important things in life, such as Sam and Dean slash-fiction.

              2. Yeah, which they should have a done a few seasons ago. As soon as they started with the Leviathan shit I knew they were going to push the show too long.

                Don’t get me wrong, it was a great show and is still better than most stuff on TV, but I’d really like it to end before that changes.

            2. They can’t. Supernatural fans are terrifying.

              1. Yes. Yes they are. I once made the mistake of going to a Farscape convention (the first one ever, actually, when I lived in NYC) because I naively thought “hey, that’ll be fun!”, and that was terrifying enough. I can’t even imagine what a pack of Supernatural fans would be like.

        2. Wait, are you saying that “none of this was actually real” episodes are lazy writing? Because that’s just craaaaaaazytalk.

          Though no one gets to talk shit about Jacob’s Ladder.

          1. I had that exact conversation with the spousal unit just last week. That it took place immediately after watching an episode of Voyager was a coincidence. Except for the bit where it wasn’t. And then I found out that the commentariat never truly existed, it was just 40 people (27 of whom were Warty) in a diabolical plot conceived by Robert Poole to take over the FCC. Because fuck the FCC.

            True story.

            1. I believe every word of it. Because I’m also Warty.

              1. Those squat numbers are less impressive when you realize there are 27 people lifting the bar together.

  2. A government agency voluntarily acceding control to the people. Yeah. They’ll get right on that, they will.

    1. No shit. The FDA’s “blankey coercion by default” current status is because they don’t like abusing power, lording it over innovators, and pointlessly delaying life-saving medications (and regenerative medicine practices) for 7-10 years. The whole idea that we need permission from a bunch of unscientific bureaucrats to save our own lives is totally and completely unacceptable, and one day will likely result in the removal of said bureaucrats like the cancer they are.

  3. Sadly, even an approach as incremental as this probably won’t get any traction.

    You shouldn’t have to meet any specific criteria or jump through any hoops to use whatever medical treatment, including drugs, that you and your physician want.

    1. You shouldn’t have to meet any specific criteria or jump through any hoops to use whatever medical treatment, including drugs, that you and your physician want.

      1. Sure. That’s what the law should be. But it’s probably a good idea (and what most people would do) in most cases to consult a physician too. And they might know about drugs that you don’t.

  4. “Speeded up”
    Wut? Is that even a word? Should it not be “sped up” instead? Am I the only one here who sees this?

      1. Yet, like the normalcy/normality debate, I struggle to understand why one is ever used over the other.

        1. Sometimes one sounds better in a certain context; alliteration, syllables, whatevs.

          1. Basically it’s a stylistic choice.

        2. And why would you “utilize” something instead of “using” it?

          1. Because you’re a cop and you think it sounds smart.

            1. +1 totality of the circuses

            2. I think there are some cases where one is more appropriate than the other. “Use” is a bit more personal.
              But cops do seem to substitute “utilize” for “use” for just the reason you state. I think there must be a class in police academy that teaches how to use unnecessarily big words.
              My other favorite cop-ism is using “persons” to say people (when they are referring to more than one person, not to the persons of multiple people)

              1. http://www.officer.com/article…..talk-funny

                Officer: I attempted to apply an escort hold to the subject, but I noted resistive tension in his arm, so I applied pain compliance instead. The subject actively resisted, so I administered a focused knee strike to the lower abdominal area, and decentralized the subject.

                Lawyer: In other words, Officer, you tried to grab my client’s arm, and when he pulled away, you twisted his wrist, and then kicked him in the groin and threw him down on the pavement, is that about it?

                Officer: Well, I wouldn’t put it in quite those words.

                Lawyer: No, Officer, I imagine you wouldn’t. No further questions.

          2. I can see a shade of difference between “utilization” and “usage”, if I squint just right.

            “Utilize” is just a pretentious way to say “use”. I can think of no sentence where “utilize” adds precision or changes meaning from “use”.

            1. I think there is some nuance in there somewhere. Maybe it’s just me.

              1. Try to think of a sentence where it changes the meaning in some way. I can’t.

                Off the top of my head, I can’t really come up with one for “utilization” v. “usage”, either.

                1. Utility in economics and political philosophy includes personal or societal value, something more subjective and less substantive, or less concrete than “usage”.
                  That’s my take anyways.

                  Try to think of a sentence where it changes the meaning in some way. I can’t.

                  Off the top of my head, I can’t really come up with one for “utilization” v. “usage”, either.

                  how about:
                  “A painting has no use other than to be hung on a wall. However, it is of high psychic utility to some very wealthy people”

            2. Amen, Dude!!! I have always hated the pretentious bastards that utilize the word “utilize”…

  5. The last thing we need is diseased people desperate for relief being preyed upon by companies with medicinal options.

    1. Better to die nobly holding out hope for a trialed and approved treatment than to spend your last months or years a guinea pig for some kkkorporate drug mill.

  6. Just call it Fast Track Clinical Trials so the anti-Choicers won’t shit themselves.

    1. Does that include the choice of conscientiously objecting to vaccinations?

      1. We scoff at your silliness. *scoffs* Clearly, “choice” is defined as a narrow limited selection of options. The antonym of “choice” is “anarchy” which is bad because roadz and puppycide and… why do I even have to explain this?

        1. Pro-choice except for vaccination, wedding cakes, charter schools, and health insurance mandates.

          1. It’s for your own good. Have a chocolate ration.

            1. Just 8%, please.

          2. And whether you pay union dues.

        2. There are people who actually will tell you that. Too much choice is bad for people because it is too hard to make the optimal choice when you have too many options. Which is probably true in a lot of cases, but is a terrible argument for restricting choice.

          1. Anyone who tells you that is an idiot. Basically in the same vein as those thumb-sucking article writers who decry having too many options in the soda isle and who think humans are powerless to resist the advertising that we all tune out automatically every day.

            More choices does not make the optimal choice hard if you know what you want. It just…gives you more options. If I want a red car and they only have red and black, if they add white and green, I still wanted the red one.

            1. Because they once read a book by a psychologist that describes the discomfort of having to choose between so many different brands of jam (or whatever), and took away from it the notion that choice should be restricted for our own good.

            2. Yeah, it’s just another of those results of stupid social science experiments that is meaningless in the real world. There is just too much information in the real world to process. It’s just part of life. If it makes life hard for some people, tough shit. And it is stupid to suggest that choice should be restricted just because some people can’t decide what they want or make bad choices.

        3. Clearly, “choice” is defined as a narrow limited selection of options.

          Abortion or delivery. Aren’t those about the only options?

  7. How about two classes:

    Class A: consumers can only sue for affects which were not disclosed publicly. Let manufacturers release as much info as they want, to protect themselves from lawsuits. Let consumers make choices based on that public information.

    Class B: consumers can’t sue for squat.

    If I had only days to live and wanted to keep trying to not die, I should be able to use any drugs at my sole discretion. That’s what Class B is for. But people who want “guaranteed” safety have to accept what is known about their Class A drugs and accept the consequences of known troubles. If manufacturers know of problems and don’t disclose them, they can be sued to oblivion for all I care.

    1. You’ll have pharmaceutical companies paying doctors to misdiagnose terminal illnesses!!!

    2. The problem with Class B is fraud. We already have a ton of fraud out there as it is. Just have a look on the supplements isle at your local pharmacy. There is also a fairly sizeable industry in terminal disease treatment fraud as well. Clinics are set up to charge tens or hundreds of thousands for sham treatments for desperate people.

      I’d like to see both of your classifications, but with an added fraud rider for any claims of effectiveness that can’t be backed up.

      Plus, we really need an Underwriter’s Laboratory for medicine. At least one, but preferably more than one multinational testing company that will conduct trials of various treatments and report on the results. Whether funded by consumers, insurance companies, physicians, etc. I’m not sure…. but the idea is to provide an independent voice for all aspects of the safety and effectiveness of a drug.

      As it stands now, we get a new acid blocker. We have no really reliable public information as to how well it prevents heartburn as compared to the currently available medicines. But the sales team will do a great job of convincing doctors to prescribe the new stuff. I’d much rather have Consumer’s Union keeping me up to date on the effectiveness and safety of Nexium. I’d wager a guess that they’d do a better job of getting followup data years down the line to let us know how safe and effective things are.

    1. Awesomeness.

  8. I love it. And as a libertarian, what’s not to love?

    How are they going to stop us anyway when we get the ability to download and print any new drug we want on our nano-assembly printers?

    There’s only one God, and his name is technology.

    1. There’s a man with a machete in the lobby who would like to have a word with you.

      1. His name isn’t Jesus. It’s Danny Trejo. Get your shit straight

      2. Sure, no problem, I’ll be bringing my AR-15 to the meeting.

        1. You mean the one with no ammo?

      3. LOL; but even a machete was once cutting edge technology . . . .

    2. Is anyone anywhere close to making such a thing? That would be some seriously awesome disruptive technology. Any compound made out of common elements would be available to anyone.

      1. I don’t think so, no. You need something that can assemble new molecules out of some kind of raw feedstock, and we ain’t even close to that yet.

      2. Closer than you think.

      3. Any compound made out of common elements

        Most drugs are molecular, as in, if you don’t have specific molecules in there, they aren’t the drug you want.

        Most drug molecules are not common at all. So you need to be able to assemble them in your printer.

        I think we’re still a long way from that.

        1. Depends. Many drugs, being organic compounds, are mostly carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, with the occasional rarer molecule(s) thrown in. Your feedstock could be mostly C, H and O (and any other relatively commonly used molecules like iron), and then there could be “rare molecule” printer cartridges (for lack of a better word) that you swap in and out for various things.

          In Diamond Age, most households have a house “printer” that can cook up just about anything they need from dinner to a pair of sneakers to a gun, and it’s fueled by a feedstock line that is similar to your current, say, water line from the city.

          1. CLOSE. YOUR. TAGS. At least I didn’t NutraSweet the link.

          2. Yeah, yeah, and we’re all going to be driving high-Tc superconducting levitators made out of diamond. Unless you’re interested in doing all of your assembly with Xe atoms at 5K with an STM, we’ve got nothing anytime soon that would allow you to just plug atoms where you want.

            1. Stop shitting on my pipe dreams!

              What, you don’t have a scanning tunneling microscope just lying around your house? Lightweight.

              1. I work next to a 5T magnet that would rip the iron out of your, um, well, it wouldn’t actually do anything to you unless you had a severe martenetic stainless fantasy. But I won’t judge you. That’s between you and your Bohr Magnetons.

                1. I’ve been near big MRIs and had forgotten to divest myself of something magnetic and could feel the pull from my pocket just getting sort of close. I’m just glad the solid titanium rod in my right femur isn’t magnetic (well, it’s weakly magnetic). Though I don’t know about the screws, they might be stainless steel.

                  1. Wait, you’ve got a rod in your right leg? That’s bizarre, I had one for a while until I had it removed.

                    1. Mine is from a snapped femur in a car accident. I know it can be taken out, but it was recommended that I not bother because it’s not hurting anything, so why go through another surgery. I’ve had it for a little over 15 years now anyway.

                      Protip: don’t get in car accidents in Wales in the UK and get put in the NHS for 10 days. You will not fucking enjoy it. Especially when you find out later that your insurance–which pays the NHS back because you’re not a citizen anyway–would have happily paid for a nice room in the private, non-NHS hospital down the street.

                    2. Tib-fib compound fracture. Car accident as well. Mine was 24 years ago.

                      It bothered the hell out of me on cold days.

                    3. I’m lucky, mine never bothers me. Now, the shattered and reconstructed calcaneous that I also got in that accident is another story. That bothers me every day.

                    4. Not a fun bone to break. I was reading a study of remains from the Roman Empire that suggested that they drove the nails through the side of the heel bone during cruxifiction because there are a ton of nerves there and very little blood supply – therefore the perfect place to inflict a lot of pain without causing death.

                      Nice guys, the Romans.

                    5. -would have happily paid for a nice room in the private, non-NHS hospital down the street.

                      Why do you always leave out the musical cues?

                    6. BECAUSE IT’S NOT FUNNY!

          3. Take a gander at this: http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-3d…..h-as-drugs
            –A ‘3D printer’ for customized small molecules such as drugs -From Ray Kurzweil’s website.

  9. Botard Haiku – what?
    Best idea ever? Yes!
    Thirteen year old girl.

    1. I guess I just don’t
      get why counting syllables
      is so popular.

      1. i was told – No Math!
        Counting is for school children.
        Poetry is life.

        1. I’m not a lover of poetry, but for some reason I pulled up Eliot’s “Prufrock” last night. I graduated high school thinking it describes me well enough.

  10. Would someone *kindly* explain why such drugs and treatments can not just be tagged with “This drug/treatment has not been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”?

    1. Make drugs like psychics? They about as reliable sometimes…

      1. More like “dietary supplements”. Some of which are silly nonsense, but some of which are actual drugs that do actual things that the FDA hasn’t gotten around to banning or regulating yet.

        1. Right. Of course, by forcing the providers to label them as non-cures, or non-treatments, they have directly asserted a blanket violation-by-default of all of our First Amendment rights to communication. But, due to the average American being a complete fucking servile idiot, they’ve gotten away with it. …Until of course, “protector” mentalities get mentally strong enough to physically remove the FDA from our lives like the cancer they are. This shouldn’t be long now, as the world is “waking up” with synthetic brains, at least some of which are likely to possess “mirror neurons” and empathy for their human parents.

          See: Hugo de Garis, Peter Voss, Stephen Omohundro, Monica Anderson and “Syntience,” Eliezer Yudkowsky, etc.

    2. Would someone *kindly* explain why such drugs and treatments can not just be tagged with “This drug/treatment has not been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”?

      Drug interactions are a real and dangerous thing.

      I don’t think a fake “we don’t intend this chemical that we are selling as a cure for the flu to be used to cure or treat the flu” quite cuts it. The FDA/FTC is doing a shit job of rooting out fraud in the supplement industry. Plus there is the outright fraud of the homeopathy crap peddled right in the pharmacy. You rarely see any enforcement action there, but when you do it is a day late and a dollar short and they just close up and reopen under a new name.

      I’d say they should be required to state the exact effects their drug has, both positive and negative. And be able to back it up with properly done studies. Ideally studies done by an independent testing lab that we consumers (and doctors and insurance companies, etc.) have come to trust. Preferably studies that are funded by the consumers, etc.

      1. All that being said, I think one of the most brilliant things I have ever seen was the “Head On” homeopathic remedy stick.

        The advertisements never claimed it would do anything. They just showed people rubbing their head in seeming pain and proclaimed “head on! Apply directly to the forehead!” That’s it. Not “and then your headache will be cured.” Just instructions for use of their wax stick placebo.

        No need for any disclaimers, as they never claimed anything at all. People sent them millions of dollars for something that not only didn’t do anything, it never claimed to do anything.

        That is real genius.

  11. In the thread on Ron Bailey’s article on immortality I mentioned that having people entrenched for too long in positions of power would stifle progress.

    I wonder how much of the FDA’s intransigence is the result of that.

    I meant that not just with regards to political power to but all of our institutions; academia, medicine, politics, etc. People tend to ossify their beliefs after a while, usually the ones they learned when they were coming up.

    Wegner’s theory of plate tectonics was ridiculed by those in power and it wasn’t until they died off that it was accepted. The same is true for Einstein’s relativity. Germ theory. Heliocentricity. I saw the same thing in the State bureaucracy when I worked there.

    Maybe putting this idea forward now is good, but I bet it won’t be until new people fill the upper ranks that it gets implemented.

    1. Technology will do much to help overturn discredited paradigms at a faster clip than before. With computer modeling, data is incontrovertible and plays out in real-time. Unless, of course, the models themselves become political tools… but what are the chances of that occurring?


      1. Technology will do much to help overturn discredited paradigms at a faster clip than before.

        It will also help unrepresented and lone scientists with lots of subject expertise but little social influence to gain lots of reputable social ground much more quickly and generally enhance the objective and good-faith repartee that science requires.


        1. It’s the magic of blogging.

      2. “Technology will do much to help overturn discredited paradigms at a faster clip than before.”

        Very true and easily observable historically.

        Ok, so maybe I am pointing out a problem that doesn’t exist, or won’t exist.

        1. I don’t think it rules out the possibility of some technology coming about that does serve to entrench people in positions of power for a long time. But I don’t think it is very likely either.

    2. Give the immortals random large doses of LSD from time to time to de-ossify their minds a bit.

    3. I count myself among the Great Minds who have been ignored… PLEASE study up on the AWESOME power of WORSHIPPING the FDA as has been revealed by Scienfoology… See http://www.churchofsqrls.com

    4. But Suthenboy, there’s also a game theory problem that comes with any drug/medical “safety” bureaucracy: if they approve something that hurts people, they are in big trouble and never hear the end of it. On the other hand, if they don’t approve something that would have helped people, those people are close to invisible. So there’s a built-in bias towards saying “no.”

      1. That’s an excellent point. Incentives matter. In theory, though, this idea as presented should alleviate that problem for the FDA, because these drugs are specifically not approved by them so they wouldn’t get into trouble/bad PR for “hurting” people. The manufacturer of the drug would. Which actually makes much more sense from an incentives standpoint.

        1. They’ll still get burned, because they will have failed to save lives, and something must be done!

          That said, I don’t really have a problem with the proposal other than it has the potential to make getting good clinical trial data even harder. Still almost certainly a net win.

      2. Bureaucrats are risk averse by nature. They only ever get punished for going outside the established procedures. And they increase their empires by creating more procedures.

        1. Exactly. There’s more risk for them in saying “Yes” than saying “No.”

    5. I don’t think that’s true. Relativity caught on pretty quickly, because it more or less matched observations. (Same with quantum theory).

      And the big knock against heliocentric theory is that people couldn’t detect a parallax because stars were so far away. Only when telescopes were invented and you could make better observations and detect a parallax could the heliocentric theory be demonstrated.

      1. I don’t think that’s true

        Indeed, it’s complete bullshit. Relativity not only explained puzzling experimental results, but tied together phenomena that were clearly related but never quite linked rigorously (electricity and magnetism). It explained things that were a huge paradox (why didn’t the Maxwell’s equations, which were experimentally verified, remain invariant under Galilean transformation?).

        It was so explanatory and so powerful, it vaulted Einstein almost immediately into the front rank of physicists.

  12. I can post from my phone now? Now you guys will get even more of me!

    …I pity you all.

  13. What about the fact they should be collecting genetic info on the people in the trials?

    For example some drugs might not work well on most of the population, but those drugs might work miracles and save the lives of people with rare genetic mutations that cause the drug to have a different effect.

    Double blind clinical trials without there being any statistical analysis done on the genetic makeup of the individuals in the trials probably leads to drugs getting canned/banned/forgotten which may be the only option for people with rarer genes.

    Pretty sure I saw a link to a video made by the Manhattan Institute regarding such a situation here on reason years back.

    1. Derp, it’s already linked to in this post.

  14. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do


  15. Principle: Egocentricity means confusing what we see and think with reality. When under the influence of egocentricity, we think that the way we see things is exactly the way things are. Egocentricity manifests itself as an inability or unwillingness to consider others’ points of view, a refusal to accept ideas or facts which would prevent us from getting what we want (or think we want).

    In its extreme forms, it is characterized by a need to be right about everything, a lack of interest in consistency and clarity, an all or nothing attitude (“I am 100% right; you are 100% wrong.”), and a lack of self-consciousness of one’s own thought processes. The egocentric individual is more concerned with the appearance of truth, fairness, and fairmindedness, than with actually being correct, fair, or fairminded. Egocentricity is the opposite of critical thought. It is common in adults as well as in children.

    As people are socialized, egocentricity partly evolves into sociocentricity. Egocentric tendencies extend to their groups. The individual goes from “I am right!” to “We are right!” To put this another way, people find that they can often best satisfy their egocentric desires through a group.


    1. Heh, I see what you did there…

    2. Yeah, the problem with Muslim extremists is that they’re just not socializing enough with each other. If they just got out more and met other, like-minded individuals, why their critical thinking skills would be unmatched!

      1. Uh, what? Where did you get that from?

        He’s just saying that libertarians are stupid egotists.

        1. Yep. Being unable to present a convincing opposing point of view (FB is one of the dumbest commenters I have read.) means that your opponent is just an egoist who thinks he is right all of the time.

          I don’t know about anyone else, but I am sold.

        2. It was a counterexample to his point. It was just the most egregious and timely one I thought of at the moment. There are plenty of other examples of “socialized” people who lack critical thinking abilities. Politicians, CEOs, actors, college students, kindergarteners, …

          1. I think he’s talking about a kind of groupthink of people with ‘egocentric’ mindsets seeking out people that think like them so that they can sit around and confirm each other’s mindsets.

          2. It is possible that I misread what was quoted. Nay, likely.

            1. Yeah, somehow I read that as “socialization breeds critical thinking ability” which does not seem to be what was said at all. In fact, if anything, the example I gave reinforces the point. Still rich coming from a guy named “Flaming Ballsack” whose critical thinking ability would put him among the less intelligent of kindergarteners.

    3. Remember kids, the guy who jumps onto threads solely to call people names and state his view as the One True Opinion is exactly the kind of person who’s an expert in egocentric matters.

      1. Oh, he’s an expert. He just doesn’t know it.

  16. Hey Y’all…

    If ye are truly interested in just HOW powerful our choices would be, if we could willingly volunteer to be on the bleeding edge of trying new crap-and-crap, w/o nannies at the FDA getting in the way… How about us fatties?!?! Excess fat is so horribly bad? Then WHY can I not expedite being a self-chosen volunteer to try the likes of THIS?!?!?


    Experimental drug turns ‘bad’ white fat into ‘good’ brown-like fat

  17. Good fucking luck battling your state physician’s boards which have literally turned the fuck into nanny machines fighting all sorts of fucking bills related to humans making decisions for their own fucking selves.

    Add these shit-chuggers to all the other clamp-minded shit-chuggers and the picture is clear… freedom isn’t ringing very clearly these goddamn days, mister dearios.

  18. Catholic Church’s Attempt to Claim Religious Exemption from Bankruptcy Law Defeated in US Circuit Court

    “Hundreds of people who claim they were sexually abused as children by Roman Catholic clergy members won a major victory against the Archdiocese of Milwaukee on Monday when a federal appeals court struck down a lower court’s decision to shield a $55 million trust from their claims.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit found that a trust created to maintain the archdiocese’s cemeteries must be made available to the alleged abuse victims and other creditors, potentially freeing up a major funding source in a contentious Chapter 11 bankruptcy case that has stretched out over more than four years.

    The archdiocese had argued using the funds to compensate victims would violate its constitutionally protected free exercise of religion. Monday’s ruling is a victory for the more than 500 abuse victims who challenged the archdiocese’s stance.”


  19. Navy Chaplain faces dismissal for alleged intolerance

    “A Pentecostal chaplain once assigned to elite Navy SEAL units may be kicked out of the Navy for allegedly scolding sailors for homosexuality and premarital sex.

    Lt. Cmdr. Wesley Modder was given a ‘detachment for cause’ letter on Feb. 17 after his commanders concluded that he is ‘intolerant’ and ‘unable to function in the diverse and pluralistic environment’ of his current assignment at the Navy Nuclear Power Training Command in South Carolina…

    The letter states that Modder:

    Told a female that she was ‘shaming herself in the eyes of god’ for having premarital sex.

    Told another student that homosexuality was wrong and that ‘the penis was meant for the vagina and not for the anus.’

    Suggested to a student that he, Modder, had the ability to ‘save’ gay people.

    ‘Berated’ a student for becoming pregnant while not married.”


    1. Modder’s replacement is Rev. Lt. Cmdr. Thaddeus (“just call me Thad”) Moshner, of the Unitarian Universalist Association.

      His inspiring battlefield sermons, like “Let’s Unleash your Inner Child,” and “the enemy has been naughty, so let’s go out and scold him in a nonjudgmental way,” help put steel in the spines our men and women in uniform.

      1. ‘Naughty?’ So he’s a fundamentalist Unitarian?

      2. When the strain of battle and the loss of dear comrades begins to wear down the soldiers, Re. Moshner leads them in a nice relaxing game of patty-cake.

        1. I would have thought sweat lodge ceremonies.

  20. Glenn Beck v. Grover Norquist

    “For years, Glenn Beck has been a vocal critic of right-wing anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist because he buys into the conspiracy theory that Norquist is a front-man for the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Anti-Muslim activist Frank Gaffney has been the leading proponent of the theory that Norquist is a secret Islamist sympathizer and Beck brought him on his radio program today to make his case against allowing Norquist to be re-elected to the board of directors of the National Rifle Association.

    Beck is so alarmed by the danger posed by Norquist that he declared that if this ‘very bad man’ is re-elected to the NRA board, he is going to cancel his membership.”


  21. Secession? Two can play at that game! Matthew McConaughey is scheduled to star in ‘The Free State Of Jones,’ as a guy who pulls his county out of Confederate Mississippi.


    1. Pfft, West Virginia put on that production a long time ago.

  22. Huma: would, would after drinks, or lol nah?

    1. I think… would.

      1. She seems two faced. It’s very confusing.

    2. I’ve made bigger mistakes.

      1. Me too. Your mom. She says hi, by the way.

        1. You’re sure not acting like it’s a mistake.

          1. Well, she is the cheapest around. I’ll just hate myself in the morning like I always do. And then I’ll get high.

            1. She says to tell you to stop with the lavish gifts. Just pay for your 5 minutes and move on.

              1. Look, I’ve told her I want her to start billing in one-minute increments. I don’t like paying for four minutes I didn’t use! What is she, a consultant?

    3. Huma: would, would after drinks, or lol nah?

      Would after drinks, but most my sex comes after drinks so I’m not sure how relevant that is. I’d also demand we snapchat video of it to Weiner.

  23. Remember.

    1. Obsession.

      1. …by Calvin Klein.

        1. Remember.

    2. Warty|3.11.15 @ 8:25PM|#
      Not difficult at all.

      1. The Maine? The Alamo? The Fifth of November?

        1. You know what.

    3. It’s bizarre. He’s pretending like nothing happened. That’s not normal.

      1. Exactly as I predicted. He has absolutely ZERO self awareness; the world is the problem, not he.
        Dangerous personality trait. There is no correction if there is no awareness of a problem.

        1. …No context? Come on, man. Cocktease.

          1. Last night, in the OSU thread:

            Sevo|3.10.15 @ 11:56PM|#

            Wasteland Wanderer|3.10.15 @ 10:57PM|#
            “We should call this thread “The Great Bo-Down of 2015″.”

            Your presumption is that Bo has enough self-awarness to realize that he’s been trashed.
            He has nothing of the sort. Bo is the equivalent of peak derp; his mirror keeps telling him something and his mommy tells him to ignore that nasty thing! Peak Bo/Derp is not finite.
            Nope. Bo is a long ways from accepting that he is a despicable asshole. He will be back, blaming you, me, him, her and anyone else for the fact that he is universally reviled.
            The world despises the insufferable twit, and therefore the world is wrong! Mommy said so!

            1. That’s probably my favorite of the bunch. Touch?, poster I’ve never seen before.

              1. I missed that one; good ‘ol Bo, trying to find the high moral ground while snuffling around in the slop!

  24. Man has heart attack, when neighbor comes to help man’s dog mauls neighbor

    “Two West Virginia men are dead and a pit bull is under quarantine after the dog’s owner suffered an apparent heart attack Sunday night and the animal attacked a neighbor who tried to help, police said.”


  25. “Imagine being named “Circumcision”?

    “When I was growing up, I didn’t understand the smiles it brought up. My mother’s name was derived from the Catholic calendar because she was born on January 1 ? the circumcision of Jesus Christ.”


  26. “FDA Get Out of the Way: Free to Choose Medicine”

    Pathetic. The medical mafia is given some marginal latitude in short circuiting some regulation, and it’s called “Free to Choose Medicine”.

    Free to Choose medicine would mean you don’t have to get permission from an agent of the state to buy whatever meds you want from whomever wants to sell them to you. That’s what *freedom* would look like.

    1. Agreed. And it would mean that you could choose what IS medicine, in which case a lot of people would choose cannabis (marijuana) instead of prescription drugs. This is not intended as a joke; it’s because it’s true.

  27. The Southern Avenger masturbates regularly to this article:

    “A Body for the Body Politic

    “The strange, sad, and gross saga of Abraham Lincoln’s two-week funeral procession.”


    1. Hottest. Year. On. Record.

  28. So the kids are sick with various viruses and I’ve been putting in extra time with Yoshi, my shiba. I wrestled the fucking hypergalactic four-legged whore for a few minutes and the bitch scratched my pinky which is bleeding purest blood ever nonstop. However, the king bonded with his fuzzy jackal and things are good… except for the fucking fact that outside in the deep woods here in the West Centralized Ohio fog has made woods seem like those fucking swamps in fallout 3 dlc. I shudder slightly then glide into the mist owning all the damn trees like a fuckin epic swamp boss and then I float back onto and into reality searching for my goddamn stout, bros.

  29. People should be allowed to take whatever they want, but they then can’t sue drug companies or bitch about any side effects that show up.

    1. IOWs, if you’re taking responsibility for what you ingest, you get ALL the responsibility.

    2. Do you think it’s easy to sue drug companies? Really? They have a ton of money, and the average consumer can hardly afford a lawyer to draft an estate plan. Only big law firms can afford to take on a case against a pharmaceutical company, and then only in the most egregious cases in which liability is pretty clear, and the damages are pretty bad and to a large group of people. If drug companies are free to market drugs, and people are free to take them, then why shouldn’t people also be free to sue drug companies?

  30. Old trees are mysterious to my reality machine. I process old tree bits like floating stars. Old trees are like best friends that say fucking nothing about really great shit. Except that old trees are not our best friends because their best friends are all dead. As a bro that owns woods and the like you have to fucking be a steward and cut down some fucking epic oaken bro/sis on the occasion so their youngsters and other specie youngsters can try thrive. Oaks have penises and vaginas… they are not like the berry trees… Oaks are gods of the unisex, totally fucking monoecious… purile and virgin and lusty and long-lived… I admit I love my red oaks and white oaks and pin oaks… I also love Hickory and its wonderful sacrifice onto my wood stove….I do have some old trees dying here that have seen indians make children and I’m interested in tech that would allow me to tap into the past life stream of patches of woods that capture past cultures breeding… tho, this tech would likely capture said cultures being erased….. it seems that that time isn’t necessary when you travel it.

    1. I’m going to sleep now. My dreams should be interesting after reading that passage.

      Or it might be some Evil Dead shit, oh well.

      1. Shop smart.

        1. Playa don’t play offbeat, dears..

          Playa play norms

          Playa be riG

          Playa be everyday

          SLightly surprised….here in fucked up world… thougt playa would be origin…

          1. You can’t quote Evil Dead?

              1. HAIL TO THE KING BABY

                1. If you’re lucky, I’ll give you a lick on my boom stick

            1. klatu barada …

    1. Funny, the left seemed OK with Code Pink et al. doing civilian diplomacy. But an open letter by comgresscritters… that’s over the line!

    2. The hardcore Left wants Obama to try 47 GOP senators with treason and then appoint their replacements. I like to think that such an act would be such a crossing of the rubicon that even the remaining House and Senate would vote to impeach.

      But I know TEAMs better than that…

  31. I’m arguing with Kurt Schlichter on Twitter (I know…it’s like a drug) and he seriously made the following claims:

    1. The primary purpose of the government is to destroy our enemies.

    2. If we kill all our enemies there will be peace.

    3. Toppling Iran’s government is a good idea because they are an enemy and their destruction is necessary for peace.


    5. Did you know that invading Iran in an already unstable Middle East is just like when we fought Germany, so if you think it’s a bad idea you would have let the Nazis win?

    I asked him what his end game is and what actually obtainable military objectives he’s after, and he responded that I ‘wasn’t being realistic.’

    Kurt Schlichter from his military days.

    1. 1. The primary purpose of the government is to destroy our enemies.

      Job well done. Especially if we can lump in market pricing and freedom into the bucket of ‘enemies’.

      2. If we kill all our enemies there will be peace.

      Umm, moving on.

      3. Toppling Iran’s government is a good idea because they are an enemy and their destruction is necessary for peace.

      Even Jimmy Carter and Reagan didn’t feel the need to topple Iran’s government.



      5. Did you know that invading Iran in an already unstable Middle East is just like when we fought Germany, so if you think it’s a bad idea you would have let the Nazis win?

      I like vanilla.

      I asked him what his end game is and what actually obtainable military objectives he’s after, and he responded that I ‘wasn’t being realistic.’

      Sort of like the NSA director responding to hypotheticals where Russia or China demand backdoors into encryption schemes as ‘not being serious’.

      1. I like vanilla.

        Stop dodging the question!

      2. Note: Those are not strawman misrepresentations of his arguments.

        This conversation began when Lucy Stiegerwald wrote this:

        Nobody elected Bill Kristol, which helps me sleep at night. People voted for Tom Cotton, and now he’s a senator. Democracy doesn’t work.

        To which that dipshit Schlichter responded:

        Why won’t you talk about Tom Cotton’s position on chemtrails? Or have they gotten to you too? #Coverup @LucyStag

        LOL! That Schlicther is such a card, responding to a rational statement by declaring his opponent unhinged!

    2. “I asked him what his end game is and what actually obtainable military objectives he’s after, and he responded that I ‘wasn’t being realistic.'”

      Yeah, pretending a war has specific goals is, uh,……….
      Suggestion: Tell Kirt he’s a slimy piece of crap and never bother to engage him again. Nothing is gained by attempting to either make sense of such horseshit, or by attempting to change his opinion.
      You are not dealing with a rational human.

  32. The galaxy is a soft landing for evolution. People came from the wriggly thangamolus and here this place tries to fucking thrive but the galaxy has lasers and aliens and this place has madonna and heroine… no way that fucking places out there will thrive like a super delicious tomorrow becuase of one thangamolous… Plato made thousans of fuckin years of bullshit… time to stop this dead shit and roll with some new

    1. You’re starting to make more sense to me every day.

      No – I have that backward. I’m starting to understand you better every day.

      This is frightening. You’re like Warty for the brain.

      I thank God you’re here, Agile! You make me smile. Peace, brother.

  33. I was at the restaurant supply house today when an item came to my attention.


    It’s in the pan right now.

    1. I make my own pork sausage patties. I grind 2.5lbs of pork cutlet with 1lb bacon and mix it up with fresh sage and garlic, then form into patties and cook.

      They’re good. I predict yours will be as well.

      1. This turned out quite sweet. I know I’ve tasted it before. It’s your generic country club sausage.

        It’s good. I’ll definitely eat the entire 4 pack. But it’s not new to me.

        1. Sage-sweet?

          1. Maple sweet.

            This place: http://www.bigforkbrands.com

            I only went to the supply house to get curing salts. I can’t help but impulse buy, though.

            1. Pl?ya Manhattan.|3.11.15 @ 11:33PM|#
              “Maple sweet.”
              Ugh. Sage I could take; maple only on pastries.

              1. You shut your whore mouth. Maple on bacon is a blessing, even if we have to import the stuff from those Godless heathens up north.

                1. Dweebston|3.12.15 @ 12:02AM|#
                  “You shut your whore mouth. Maple on bacon is a blessing,”
                  Uh, well, to some of us.

            2. BTW, I like it’s ‘locally made’ and then shipped to So Cal. Is it now, uh, locally relocated?

  34. What a difference a day makes. Yesterday Reason was complaining that the “secret” capital punishment drugs might not be FDA approved.

    1. Nihilist Denialist|3.12.15 @ 12:17AM|#
      “What a difference a day makes. Yesterday Reason was complaining that the “secret” capital punishment drugs might not be FDA approved.”

      I’m gonna guess that statement is intended to mislead. Let’s see a cite.

  35. This guy has to wake up every day and figure out how to get through another one of these without blowing his brains out on live television.

    I realize it’s a free country, but I still almost feel bad for the guy.

  36. I just fucking stopped someone from slipping into that future …. where my face kissed a reason scribola

    1. How often do you take hallucinogens? And if the answer is once a week or more, do you wanna hang out soon?

  37. So, two cops shot during a protest in Ferguson…

    And before this, a local reporter (Fox 2 News) was attacked while on air. Not severely, but mobbed and they had to cut away.

    Stuff like this shows that cops are the lesser of two evils. They might be thugs, but they are better than mobs.

  38. Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me. I started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month… The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start… This is where to start……===========

  39. A very excellent idea. One that libertarians like myself have been advocating for some time. I would make however one major change. That is, the repeal of prescription laws. To be replaced by “adult signature required” so that people have the legal right to take medical drugs without first paying to obtain the “permission” oif a physician to do so.

    For more information see my blog at “muskegonlibertarian.wordpress.com”.

    1. Finally, a comment that actually relates to the article; they’ve been few and far between. I’d add to it these further provisios: (1) that decisions about which drugs to release for public consumption must be made by a vote of the actual scientists and doctors working at the FDA, not by some political appointee, (2) that each such employee will provide written explanation of why she or he voted release up or down, and that this information all be posted to the Internet at a common, FDA website, organized by alphabetical-ized generic and brand drug names, so consumers could search for and read info to help them make informed decisions, and (3) medical marijuana be decriminalized and available as an alternative to any synthetic drug.

  40. Look at how long it’s taken to get olfactory nerve cell transplants for treating spinal cord damage from rodent tests, to successfully treating dogs paralyzed in accidents to FINALLY one human who had his spinal cord completely severed when he was stabbed in the back.

    Now he’s regaining function below the point of injury. It’s damned amazing! IT WORKS! Why isn’t this quickly becoming the “go to” procedure for most spinal cord injuries? There’s no problem with transplant rejection because the procedure uses one’s own olfactory nerve cells.

    1. Another WTH aren’t they using this? is using BBG (Brilliant Blue G) food dye as an emergency treatment for spinal cord injuries. In cases where the cord isn’t severed, paralysis or loss of function still results due to the inflammation reaction causing the neurons to fire wildly and rapidly until they “burn out”. BBG binds to the same sites that the inflammation causing compounds released from injured tissue do. Dyed up, the nerve cells can’t be attacked by the inflammation compounds. The dose required can tinge your skin and mucosa (and the whites of your eyes) blue for a while. Would you rather look like the offspring of a Kree and a Fremen for a while or be paralyzed?

      So why isn’t BBG in the medical kits of EMTs? It works but it’s not being used.

      One treatment that is grinding along slowly is the Methylene blue compound called LMTX. TauRX Therapeutics is seeking people with Alzheimers for Phase III testing. Their earlier formula, Rember, had some good results but trials were stopped due to some patients having an adverse reaction.

      1. Not a drug but proven effective is the infection prevention checklist. When originally implemented, hospitals using it saw their post-operative infection rates decline a lot, one even dropped to zero. Then the insurance companies got involved. Can’t use that checklist because if someone gets an infection anyway they could sue and claim you didn’t follow the checklist properly. The physician who came up with the checklist was inspired by airplane pilots pre-takeoff checklists that they go through *every flight* to ensure they don’t miss something that could cause problems.

        He knew that the cause of most post-op infections was due to someone in the operating room or giving post-op treatments like IVs, drawing blood or giving injections not strictly following 100% of the infection prevention procedures that work. So, a checklist that is used EVERY time anything is poked into a human body. One would think such a concept would be obvious and eagerly accepted by every medical institution around the world…

  41. Yet another revolutionary medical thing is the AB-180 blood pump. It’s designed to be temporarily implanted and completely take over from an ailing heart. It was only tried in people thisclose< to already being dead from heart failure, so results were poor. Then a young woman in the UK got a viral infection that attacked her heart. She happened to be taken to a hospital where physicians knew of the AB-180 and got one rushed there in time to implant it. By the time it was turned on, her heart had completely stopped beating. Over the next several days her heart was able to rest and recover so it could beat normally.

    Think that incident would be enough to prove the pump works? Ha! There have been several other instances of LVAD (Left Ventricular Assist Device) allowing a damaged heart to rest and recover to the point where the patient no longer needed a heart transplant. LVADs and other partial or total heart assist devices are still not regularly used to enable damaged hearts to heal for avoidance of transplants.

    1. There have been times when the FDA has halted trials early and approve drugs due to impressive positive results. In some of those cases it’s come back to bite because by chance nobody in the test group had any bad reactions, then as the drug got into wider use some people had adverse reactions up to and including death.

      So why don’t they develop tests to see if a person will have a bad reaction before giving them the pill or injection? Some type of blood test or take a small skin sample?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.