theprof00 on 25 August 2009
My friend also brought up an argument that people are going to want the most powerful drug available, and if someone dies because they were given a "second rate" drug (one that isn't touted as the best defense) they will sue.
I feel that some of these first rate drugs are the kind you described; they are lifelong treatments with side-effects which are treated by other drugs. It would seem that if, for example, a 5$ drug with a 49% effectiveness could substitute a 100$ drug with a 52% chance, and nobody could be allowed to sue if effectiveness falls in the crack, things would be much better.
What are your thoughts?
