Tag Archives: right to try law

Right to Try Bill in Oregon: What’s Going On?

Hey all, so here’s the archived public hearing in the Oregon Senate on Right to Try, HB 2300! Check it out.
Link to the public hearing on June 1st.

So what’s going on right now? With just a little more digging, I found out. HB 2300 is in a senate committee, and there will be another hearing on Wednesday, June 3rd, at 3:00. Let’s keep our fingers crossed!

Here’s where you can go to track the progress of the Oregon bill.

The UC-Davis Ethics Conference, Part 7: The Mystery Man Revealed!

At the end of Part Six, we were finally about to learn the identity of the mystery man who’d spoken up at Tim Caulfield’s lecture the night before… and in Part Seven, we finally do…
Continue reading

UC-Davis Stem Cell Ethics Conference, Part 4

So here it is, y’all– the fourth installment! This is the LAST “notes from raw slides” section, SO please keep hanging in there… because this is important. Reading these notes may not the most entertaining activity on earth; believe me, I know. (I had to transcribe them from horrible blurry pics!) But there’s a lot to be gleaned here. If you’ve ever wondered how a drug goes from concept to market, this is one you want to read. (Just go down to Slide 9.)

Continue reading

The UC-Davis Stem Cell Ethics Conference, The Whole Story: Part Two

At the end of part one, Tim Caulfield, keynote speaker at the conference, was addressing the problem of illegal stem cell clinics worldwide…


Tim Caulfield looked up. “So what’s the harm?” he asked.

I wasn’t sure if anyone in the audience was supposed to answer the question, but I did not have a good feeling about whatever was coming next.
Continue reading

Arizona Passed “Right to Try”

So… as everyone may have heard, Arizona voters just passed Proposition 303, the “Right to Try Law.” This event didn’t get anywhere near the media press that it should have (I didn’t read anything about it until today, in a Vancouver B.C. paper.) Here’s a good summary:

The measure will allow investigational drugs, biological products or devices to be made available to eligible terminally ill patients. The term “investigational” refers to medical treatments that have completed phase one of a clinical trial but have not yet been approved for general use by the Food and Drug Administration and remain under investigation in clinical trials.

I don’t know. I’m afraid that this is one of those things that sounds better than it is… one of the main problems being that it doesn’t do anything at all towards helping patients and their families to actually afford these drugs. Insurance companies do NOT need to cover them, which really, really bothers me. And there are a lot of companies who I wouldn’t trust a zillionth as far as I could throw them with an anvil tied on when it comes to this issue.

But… four states have already approved the same kind of referendums (Colorado, Louisiana, Missouri and Michigan.) The Colorado initiative was a lot better known, and the interesting thing is that biotech company Neuralstem has been a big player. The irony is that they’re one of the very few companies I would halfway trust to do a decent job with this, and yet I think they’re clearly participating in the process of opening the door to that slippery slope– remember that anvil-tied-on thing?

Overall, another issue, of course, is that these are state laws, and they’re going to be superceded by federal law when it comes to what the FDA will and won’t do. So that may sink the whole project. And then there’s the fact that only terminal illnesses will be covered. What about AMD? What about diseases that steal all quality of life and yet aren’t strictly “terminal?” Why not cover those too, if any are going to come in under the law at all?

I think the final message is that these “right to try” laws represent an idea that is something to watch. I can see both good and bad here. And hopefully, the bad won’t predominate. YMMV.