16
Mr. LLOYD. Only after it has been shown that other methodology
has been used. Let me address the one caveat that you had which
is that the patient may not know what is in the marketplace.
I am certainly not a medical man but I have found that if there
is indeed a methodology, a drug, et cetera, that will address the
illness of an individual, particularly if it is available somewhere
else in the world, then it is almost universally known to those who
suffer from that kind of a physical problem because of the grape-
vine that occurs. If we know of something that is a good way to
work, then we tend to pass that on, particularly in the areas of
certain specific diseases, whether it is cancer or arthritis.
For instance, I have found out that I am nearly a medical expert
on knee injuries because I have injured my knee so often playing
ball. It is not that I am capable of giving medical advice, but in
reality I have given advice to people, particularly as to having a
knee operation where they remove the meniscus.
I have advised people, particularly if they are still ambulatory,
not to make that kind of a decision, without at least doing this,
this, this or that. All of this ends up by having them go back to
their doctor. But the fact remains that I clearly know the problems
that are present.
I am just using myself as an example where I have gone to the
library and read a great deal about the subject and made the
decisions. I have had what they call orthoscopy done on my knees
on three separate occasions. Each time the man says, you should
have your knees operated on, and each time I have decided against
it.
So I am saying the sufferer has a better feel for the disease
sometimes than even medical people, particularly in bureaucratic
application where we are trying to take the common denominator.
That is what I am trying to address. This is just a thought.
I thank you very much. I have taken much too much time.
Mr. SYMмs. Mr. Chairman, if I can just make one other com-
ment. The overall question of what has happened to the FDA since
1962, if one will study it, and I have spent a great deal of time
looking into it, we have a general drug lag, a slowdown because of
the efficacy requirements of being able to prove that something is
effective.
Now, Bob Duncan just testified that he knows that using DMSO
on his shoulder that has bursitis is effective. It may be more
difficult or expensive for the pharmaceutical company to prove
that, but because of that we have a tremendous drug lag in the
United States.
Here is a country that has put 12 men on the moon and yet our
patients in this country are not able to have access unless they
happen to be wealthy enough to fly to Europe for treatment. They
don't have access to products that would be relatively rather inex-
pensive and we have the wherewithal, the system, the pharmaceu-
tical companies, the technology, the doctors, et cetera, to get these
products to the people and the patient.
Yet it is a bureaucratic entanglement in Washington, D.C.,
which is causing a drug lag. It costs us 50 to 75 cents to $1 for
every prescription to prove all these things. There is a slowdown. It
becomes a nightmare when one examines what is happening.
