Editorial: Misplaced priorities
Friday, Sept. 16, 2005 | 8:54 a.m.
People whose lives depend upon a pacemaker would want to know immediately if any problems were being detected with the brand implanted within them. They would trust that their doctor, or the device's manufacturer, or the Food and Drug Administration -- somebody -- would make it a priority to inform them. But a report in the New York Times this week revealed that the current procedure for reporting heart-device failures tends to stay between the manufacturer and the FDA, while generally excluding doctors and patients.
The Times' interest in the issue began in March when a college student in Minnesota died. His pacemaker was flawed, the paper reported, and the manufacturer afterward issued a recall. The Times reported that the manufacturer, Guidant Corp., had known about the flaw in its Ventak Prizm 2 DR defibrillator for three years, but kept selling it anyway despite the introduction of an improved one. The corporation's excuse, that it had made all necessary disclosures in annual reports required by the FDA, is now under review. According to the Times, heart specialists are asking whether such routine and often vague disclosure is adequate protection for patients.
In our view, it is not. This became obvious when the Times reported that Guidant had provided exact statistics about the short-circuiting as part of its lengthy annual report submitted to the FDA in February. It took the FDA until June to alert the public, following reporting in the Times that had begun in May. That same month, Guidant finally got around to alerting doctors.
A spokesman for the FDA told the Times that it ties up too many resources to review the hundreds of filings the agency receives each year and determine what information should be released. That's because the FDA initially regards the annual reports as proprietary, meaning that its first instinct is to protect the manufacturers' competitive interests. In our view, the FDA's first instinct should be to protect the public. Manufacturers should be required to inform the FDA about possible risks to the public as soon as they become known. Separate risk reports are needed, as is an FDA that puts the public's interest ahead of the manufacturer's interest.
archive
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- ‘Stripper-mobile’ with live dancers raises safety, decency concerns
- Manny Pacquiao, Miguel Cotto arrive at MGM Grand
- Report: State’s economy worse off than any other
- Harrah’s launches program to focus on small group travel
- Encore, M Resort added to Forbes Travel list
- Rebels survive scare from Division-II Washburn
- Study cites challenges of Nevada’s financial problems
- Las Vegas sees first monthly visitor increase since May 2008
- Dispute over casino baccarat systems prompts lawsuit
- Tourism companies embrace social media strategies
Blogs
TUF Heavyweights
Episode 9: Funky chickens
Shark Bytes
Players on championship team always worked hard (8 Comments)
Sports: Upon Further Review
Fight snapshot: Predictions for Pacquiao-Cotto (1 Comment)
The Kats Report
A lesson in information dissemination, with a little Twitter and a lot of Agassi
Now and Then
Ichabods were tougher than they sound (4 Comments)
Politics: Ralston's Flash
I shudder to think what the “amazing door prize from the governor” might be (8 Comments)
Pew Center report finds what others have: Nevada's economy depressed, future in doubt (9 Comments)
Calendar »
- 12 Thu
- 13 Fri
- 14 Sat
- 15 Sun
- 16 Mon
-
Las Vegas Wranglers vs. Utah Grizzlies
Orleans Hotel-Casino
-
Lily Tomlin at the Hollywood Theatre
Hollywood Theatre at MGM Grand
-
Leonard Cohen at The Colosseum
The Colosseum | 8 p.m. to 11 p.m.
-
Football specials at Diablo's
Diablos Cantina
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Technorati










