[_2d30]

> Sure, you can come up with some standard numbers in an hour. But it wouldn't be the most thoughtful analysis, and the decision isn't really about a single efficacy estimate anyway.

No one is saying don't be thorough. What I'm saying and Makary is saying and the UK is saying is that the required thoroughness shouldn't take this long and when it does, real human lives are lost and sustained invasive measures in the freedoms of individuals are required.

> I guess I figure if you're going to go down this route of pissing matches over how fast you can do an analysis on how big of a dataset, why the hell even have an FDA anyway?

What a ridiculous leap. That's so many logical steps away from "the FDA moves way too slow" it's an absurdity. Who is arguing against the FDA's existence other than I guess you now sort of???