15
signs the order and something turns out bad, then they come back
and blame you.
But it is easy if you just say no. You are not faced with the
personal crisis that the patient and the doctor are faced with that
are trying to get the medicine.
So the physician and the patient in a relationship between those
two and the scientific community may be willing to take the risk
because if a patient is immobile and unable to live any kind of a
normal life, they may be willing to take a risk and try a new
product. Yet the bureaucracy itself is insensitive insofar as they
are not making a decision based on a personal risk.
Mr. LLOYD. Maybe we ought to consider some legislation-I
really feel that perhaps it would be up to you or Mr. Duncan or
maybe the chairman of the committee-legislation which in es-
sence says, that the sufferer of this disease, in this case arthritis,
although it could be cancer or something else, may request, when
witnessed and noted properly, any specific medicine that they feel
would be of benefit to them after it is clearly shown by their
medical history that they have received the attention of what is
known as the normal world of medicine. Then beyond that, maybe
they should have that right to use whatever that drug may be. Of
course, we have seen this with cancer and in other areas.
They, of course, then assume full responsibility and at that point
it relieves the FDA of that responsibility. What would you think of
that kind of legislation?
Mr. SYMMS. I think that the problem with that is that most
certainly I think in some cases that does happen, even today under
our present circumstances. However, if we can't get a policy that
can work kind of across the board, which I think my Drug Reform
Act would do, to help expedite and get decisions, yes or no-and
also our bill goes into the patent problem so that you extend the
years of the patent from the time the application is made until it is
granted so there is an incentive for people to do it-if you do what
the gentleman is suggesting, I think the only weakness, and I
would favor that over nothing, is that oftentimes just because of
the difficulties of knowledge, distance, communication, et cetera,
people may just not know about it. Maybe they have not had the
opportunity, say, that Mr. Duncan has had to know Dr. Jacob and
know what he is doing with DMSO.
I think what we really need is a broad attitude which would not
only cover DMSO but would cover other products. We have had the
problem with valferrate. We have had the problem with erythrocin
for tuberculosis which took so long to get them on the market in
the United States where other places in the world people were
using these products very well.
Part of this is because of our overrestrictive amendments which
passed in 1962. They have most certainly delineated a cause for a
slowdown in the ability of the FDA to make those judgments and
make them expeditiously.
Mr. LLOYD. I am trying to address what Mr. Duncan was talking
about, which is to be very careful.
Mr. SYMMS. You are saying, allow the patient and the doctor to
make the decision instead of the bureaucrat?
