Skip to content

With a Trump-driven reduction of nearly 2,000 employees, F.D.A. will Use A.I. in Drug Approvals to ‘Radically Increase Efficiency’

Technology
91 69 40
  • Don't lose too much sleep over it.

    This is likely going to be "Oops, all placebos!" in our future.

    Taking a drug that doesn't work is not necessarily the same as taking a placebo. I have suffered a lot from drug side effects, and some have hurt me long-term, years after I stopped taking the medicine. I am incredibly wary of taking anything new, even before all the horrors of 2025. With even worse approval processes, I expect that a lot of harmful and potentially debilitating or deadly stuff is going to end up on pharmacy shelves soon.

  • Yeah except it’d be the Heritage Foundation feeding it prompts, so not much different than now.

    Monkey paw finger curls inward

  • So we're going to depend on AI, which can't reliably remember how many fingers humans have, to take over medical science roles. Neat!

    Different types of AI, different training data, different expectations and outcomes. Generative AI is but one use case.

    It's already been proven a useful tool in research, when directed and used correctly by an expert. It's a tool, to give to scientists to assist them, not replace them.

    If you're goal to use AI to replace people, you've got a bad surprise coming.

    If you're not equipping your people with the skills and tools of AI, your people will become obsolete in short time.

    Learn AI and how to utilize it as a tool, you can train your own model on your own private data and locally interrogate the model to do unique analysis typically not possible in realtime. Learn the goods and bads of technology and let your ethics guide how you use it, but stop dismissing revolutionary technology because the earlier generative models weren't reinforced enough get fingers right.

  • Text to avoid paywall

    The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.

    Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.

    “The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.

    The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.

    Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.

    “I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”

    Things LLM can't do well without extensive checking on large corpus of data:

    • summarizing
    • providing informed opinions

    What is it they want to make "more efficient" again? Digesting thousands of documents, filter extremely specific subset of data, and shorten the output?

    Oh.

  • Different types of AI, different training data, different expectations and outcomes. Generative AI is but one use case.

    It's already been proven a useful tool in research, when directed and used correctly by an expert. It's a tool, to give to scientists to assist them, not replace them.

    If you're goal to use AI to replace people, you've got a bad surprise coming.

    If you're not equipping your people with the skills and tools of AI, your people will become obsolete in short time.

    Learn AI and how to utilize it as a tool, you can train your own model on your own private data and locally interrogate the model to do unique analysis typically not possible in realtime. Learn the goods and bads of technology and let your ethics guide how you use it, but stop dismissing revolutionary technology because the earlier generative models weren't reinforced enough get fingers right.

    when directed and used correctly by an expert

    They're also likely to fire the experts.

  • Text to avoid paywall

    The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.

    Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.

    “The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.

    The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.

    Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.

    “I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”

    IF bribe_received: return ("Approved")

  • ai has a place in drug development, but this is not how it should be used at all

    there should always be a reliable human system to double check the results of the model

    I have to quibble with you, because you used the term "AI" instead of actually specifying what technology would make sense.

    As we have seen in the last 2 years, people who speak in general terms on this topic are almost always selling us snake oil. If they had a specific model or computer program that they thought was going to be useful because it fit a specific need in a certain way, they would have said that, but they didn't.

  • Text to avoid paywall

    The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.

    Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.

    “The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.

    The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.

    Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.

    “I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”

  • Text to avoid paywall

    The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.

    Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.

    “The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.

    The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.

    Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.

    “I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”

    People will die because of this.

  • Efficiency =/= Accuracy or safety

    I can efficiently put a screw in drywall with an electric drill, but it doesn’t mean it will hold it up or attach it to anything.

    Furthermore, something can be efficient in different ways depending on the criteria. Something can even be efficient in one context and inefficient in a different one. Efficiency as they use it is too vague.

  • I also prefer 100% natural ground insects in my food over artificial dyes.

    (Just teasing for funsies)

    Ricin is natural and one of the most potent plant-produced poisons.

  • Text to avoid paywall

    The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.

    Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.

    “The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.

    The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.

    Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.

    “I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”

    My experiences with most AI is that you really, really need to double check EVERYTHING they do.

  • People will die because of this.

    I'll try arguing in the opposite direction for the sake of it:

    An "AI", if not specifically tweaked, is just a bullshit machine approximating reality same way human-produced bullshit does.

    A human is a bullshit machine with an agenda.

    Depending on the cost of decisions made, an "AI", if it's trained on properly vetted data and not tweaked for an agenda, may be better than a human.

    If that cost is high enough, and so is the conflict of interest, a dice set might be better than a human.

    There are positions where any decision except a few is acceptable, yet malicious humans regularly pick one of those few.

  • when directed and used correctly by an expert

    They're also likely to fire the experts.

    They already have.

  • People will die because of this.

    Yeah I'm going to make sure I don't take any new drugs for a few years. As it is I'm probably going to have to forgo vaccinations for a while because dipshit Kennedy has fucked with the vaccination board.

  • I'll try arguing in the opposite direction for the sake of it:

    An "AI", if not specifically tweaked, is just a bullshit machine approximating reality same way human-produced bullshit does.

    A human is a bullshit machine with an agenda.

    Depending on the cost of decisions made, an "AI", if it's trained on properly vetted data and not tweaked for an agenda, may be better than a human.

    If that cost is high enough, and so is the conflict of interest, a dice set might be better than a human.

    There are positions where any decision except a few is acceptable, yet malicious humans regularly pick one of those few.

    Your argument becomes idiotic once you understand the actual technology. The AI bullshit machine's agenda is "give nice answer" ("factual" is not an idea that has neural center in the AI brain), and "make reader happy". The human "bullshit" machine, has many agendas, but it would have not got so far if it was spouting just happy bullshit (but I guess America is a becoming a very special case).

  • People will die because of this.

    pretty sure that's the basis of it's appeal for them

  • Yeah I'm going to make sure I don't take any new drugs for a few years. As it is I'm probably going to have to forgo vaccinations for a while because dipshit Kennedy has fucked with the vaccination board.

    Just check if the drug is approved in a proper country of your choice.

  • Yeah I'm going to make sure I don't take any new drugs for a few years. As it is I'm probably going to have to forgo vaccinations for a while because dipshit Kennedy has fucked with the vaccination board.

    If you can afford it, there is always the vaccines from other countries. It's fucked up that it's come to this and there's even more of a price tag on health.

  • Text to avoid paywall

    The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.

    Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.

    “The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.

    The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.

    Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.

    “I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”

    Oh good, a 60% chance you’ll get an ineffective or killer drug because they’ll use AI to analyze the usage and AI to report on it.

  • Right to Repair Gains Traction as John Deere Faces Trial

    Technology technology
    30
    1
    622 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    96 Aufrufe
    R
    Run the Jewels?
  • Musk's X sues New York state over social media hate speech law

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 179 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    R
    They've probably just crunched the numbers and determined the cost of a recall in Canada was greater than the cost of law suits when your house does burn down
  • 59 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    C
    "mistakes"
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 85K – A Melhor Opção para Quem Busca Diversão e Recompensas

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 6 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    blue_berry@lemmy.worldB
    Cool. Well, the feedback until now was rather lukewarm. But that's fine, I'm now going more in a P2P-direction. It would be cool to have a way for everybody to participate in the training of big AI models in case HuggingFace enshittifies
  • 48 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    L
    Arguably we should be imposing 25% DST on digital products to counter the 25% tariff on aluminium and steel and then 10% on everything else. The US started it by imposing blanket tariffs in spite of our free trade agreement.