Publication:
No Humans Have Been Injured in the Testing of this Drug: The New Animal Efficacy Rule

Thumbnail Image

Date

2004

Published Version

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

No Humans Have Been Injured in the Testing of this Drug: The New Animal Efficacy Rule (2004 Third Year Paper)

Research Data

Abstract

This paper examines the “Animal Efficacy Rule,†a regulation that provides for the approval of products by the FDA when efficacy testing on humans is ethically impossible. It gives a summary of the history of the enactment of this regulation and outlines its structure and major features. Next, the regulation is analyzed in light of statutory authority, ethics, and practicality. Finally the approval of pyridostigmine bromide under the Animal Efficacy Rule is evaluated in light of these concerns to determine whether the rule is acting as intended, illustrating remaining problems in implementation. The article concludes that while the Animal Efficacy Rule meets ethical requirements and is capable of being implemented given careful supervision, the FDA does not have statutory authority to make such regulation and thus a legislative solution is preferable.

Description

Other Available Sources

Keywords

Food and Drug Law, ethics, drug testing, animal efficacy rule

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories