A little more than six months ago,
we reviewed then-pending federal right-to-try legislation.
Since then it's become a shiny object, capable of distracting
those governing the country from more important matters. One version, H.R. 5247, just passed the House
of Representatives. Another version, S. 204, which we reviewed in
our prior post, passed the Senate last August.
Setting aside from our general view that right-to-try
legislation isn't enough (if any) of an improvement over the
FDA's already operating compassionate use program to be worth
the legislative bother, is this version any better than the
last?
The answer is yes.
First of all, it's more limited. The prior version applied
to any "life threatening condition," without requiring
that the threat be imminent. The House-passed bill is not as
overbroad. This new version applies only to conditions with
"reasonable likelihood that death will occur within a matter
of months." That's much more in line with
