I was entertained by an article this morning on workcompcentral regarding a drug manufacturer that is suing the FDA for infringing its right to free speech. Amarin Pharma is upset that it cannot market its fish oil drug for "off-label" uses. You can't make this stuff up.
A quick refresher (admittedly oversimplified) on the FDA's role as a regulatory body: A drug manufacturer discovers (or purchases) a chemical entity which they believe has a therapeutic benefit for a particular disease state. The drug manufacturer runs studies (typically across three phases) to test both the safety and efficacy of the chemical entity for that specified disease state. Application is made to the FDA and the FDA evaluates all of the evidence. If the application is approved, the FDA mandates that the drug only be marketed to doctors, patients, and other stakeholders for the specified disease state on which the research and development were conducted. The FDA does this through the drug's "label" and any marketing for uses not contained on the label (or "off-label" uses) is a violation of federal law.
So... if you come up with a drug to manage, say, prostate enlargement... and you conduct years worth of studies on the safety and efficacy of the drug for prostate enlargement... and it turns out, after all that, the drug is also causing men with male pattern baldness to grow new hair... you can't simply change your mind and market the drug for male pattern baldness instead of prostate enlargement. You have to go back through the phase I, II, and III development process (or, at least, recast the data drawn from those studies) to create sufficient evidence for FDA approval to allow you to market the drug for that purpose. (This actually happened, by the way. Ever heard of Propecia?)
The argument being made by Amarin is a great example of unintentional comedy: they feel their free speech rights are being infringed because the off-label uses which they'd like to communicate are "truthful" and "non-misleading." They should be able to market fish oil for off-label usage... because it really works... trust them.
This comes down to a fundamental question of regulatory oversight: "Truthful" and "non-misleading" according to whom?
This is why the FDA exists. I have been a vociferous critic of the agency for its lack of consistency, its approval of questionable medications, and its lack of emphasis on the public health effects of its approval process. But I have never questioned the necessity of a third party regulatory agency intended to protect Americans from potentially delusional and dangerous claims of safety and efficacy from the pharmaceutical industry.
By the way, Amarin is publicly traded (NASDAQ: AMRN.) My investment advice is worth exactly what you're paying for it... but I might think about a short position on any company willing to waste money on this kind of frivolous lawsuit.