This story, while basically good, contains inaccuracies and omissions that seriously decrease the reader's understanding of the issue. Saying that it's hard for scientists to find results, for example, suggests that scientists can find all the results, if they just try hard enough, which is not accurate. The pharmaceutical industry has sued and harrassed researchers who've wanted to publish unfavorable results, leaving many studies partially or entirely unpublished. Who are the "critics" and "outside advisors" who are mentioned? Where is any mention of the physician authors of books criticizing the the industry, or of the impressive financial gains and unethical sales/marketing campaigns of the pharmaceutical industry? Still, ... More »

This story is very good on informing the reader of the problem that the FDA has in policing new drugs and their adverse effects on consumers. What the story is missing is the back end--the process that the drug manufacturers go through to determine adverse effects, and whether that process is adequate to insure safety and efficacy of the drugs.

The story is of special interest to those of us who have been exposed to multiple drugs simultaneously, developed a strong negative reaction/allergic reaction and can find almost no information on which ones or combinations of drugs could be likely causes. The doctors have no way to pre-check for negative reactions so they roll the dice and shrug their shoulders.