The greatest advancement with mRNA is that you can have a vaccine in under a month. But that doesn't help if for each new mRNA encoding you need 9 months worth of health & safety trials.
The greatest advancement with mRNA is that you can have a vaccine in under a month. But that doesn't help if for each new mRNA encoding you need 9 months worth of health & safety trials.
You can get fast tracked if you show superior effectiveness, meet an unmet medical need, or get rid of serious side effects of an existing therapy. We should look at ways to speed up this process, (in the grand scheme of things 9 months isn't that long to wait to cure a disease) not eliminate it altogether. If we approved something that actually does harm, it will further undermine efforts to widely vaccinate the public. We already have issues with people trusting vaccines when there is no evidence of negative effects, I can't imagine how hard it would be if we had another thalidomide on our hands.
true, but there are loopholes. the 510(k) loophole for medical devices where any device that is "substantially equivalent" to an existing approved device can get fast track approval has proved problematic. this has been publicly documented both in the press and in independent documentaries for some time.
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/premarket-submissions/pr...
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-selection.htm#:~:tex....
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/how-fluvaccine-made.htm
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4947948/#irv123...