I still think they need another category than what they have now.
My understanding of the current categories of drugs are you have "banned" and "has this specific therapeutic effect that costs billions of dollars to prove".
A category of "this doesn't kill you" in the middle would probably alleviate most of this. Insurance only has to pay for things with proven therapeutic effects, but you can shield people from poison and get a lot more data way cheaper by having his middle category.
The requirement to test for efficacy and not just safety was only added in response to Thalidomide (which disaster had nothing to do with testing for efficacy). So what you're asking for is very not radical.
My understanding of the current categories of drugs are you have "banned" and "has this specific therapeutic effect that costs billions of dollars to prove".
A category of "this doesn't kill you" in the middle would probably alleviate most of this. Insurance only has to pay for things with proven therapeutic effects, but you can shield people from poison and get a lot more data way cheaper by having his middle category.