Right to Try Laws for Obtaining Experimental Treatments

It looks like there may be a legal workaround the FDA to obtain experimental drugs.

https://arstechnica.com/science/201...o-weaken-fda-according-to-lawmaker-behind-it/

What does this mean for drugs intended to cure hearing loss that are currently undergoing trials, or in a preclinical phase?

Would tinnitus be considered a "life threatening" disease?

If your state or province already has a "right to try" law, does that mean that you could have your ENT work directly with a drug company to obtain these treatments?

 

The same ENT’s who think tinnitus is a minor inconvenience....no biggie?

As always John I admire your pioneering attitude but would any of them really go the extra mile for us overreacting ‘drama queens.’?

If they truly understood it was life and death, maybe they would. But none of them realise this until it’s too late I’m afraid.

 

we have to be crybabies, drama queens, and over sensitive about our suffering combined with crippling depression to get what we want. I challenge cultural norms by openly encouraing feeling sorry for myself. Both western and eastern culture seem to have dogmatic views that this is a bad thing.


There's no shame not wanting to undo muffled hearing in my right ear and zapping noises in my head.

 

Take NT-3 for example preventing and reversing hearing loss immediately after acoustic trauma, if there is a way to administer NT-3 to the cochlea instead of a steroid, obviously that requires bypassing clinical trials, why not risk it, rather then watch the person go half deaf with barely effective steroids?

https://www.google.com/search?q=nt-3+hearing+loss
read here about the science

 

I speak for myself but I’m at the point where I would happily allow you two @Contrast and @JohnAdams to experiment on me and if it goes tits up, puh!