You don’t like it you don’t have to read the blog article. I assure you are not the intended audience. For the rest of us it provided valuable insight.
This is a good point. Doctors can prescribe drugs approved for disease X off label to treat disease Y even when effectiveness against Y has not been proven. In this case, the drug has not been approved for any disease so it can't be prescribed. Just goes to show how arbitrary the rules are.
Completely false comparison because the drug in question did provw safety though the clinical trial, only effectiveness that could not be determined. People should have options that are not certain death.
Picture the situation: someone you love has just been diagnosed with a death sentence disease with no know treatment. The FDA just chose not to outlaw a promising but unproven new treatment for it. Now you get to choose whether to take it or not. And somehow the FDA are evil twisted bad guys!?
The author clearly needs to add to his skills the ability to give advice while not being condescending. In particular the bit about how in the good old days everyone had excellent social skills and calligraphy but now youngsters have done away with decency in favor of smartphones.
I liked duckduckgo a couple years ago before it started insisting on showing results in the language associated to my IP address. Since then I've liked brave a lot better.