To be honest, I wish the FDA was tougher. They're so many drugs, we are currently taking, that are just slightly better than placebo--and that's with fuzzy statistics, and a bunch of questionable studies.
I took so many pointless medications over the years. When I was younger, I just figured if the drug/devise was FDA approved; it must be efficient? I was wrong!
I actually wish the FDA was far less strict. One of the reasons we have so many ineffective drugs is that the FDA values safety over everything else. The ideal drug to get licensed is a sugar pill that due to statical chance (or fraud) shows a slight effect. No side effects and you can sell it to everyone. Of course it wouldn’t do anything, but it would make you a lot of money.
If the FDA was less strict then drug companies would develop drugs that actually worked, but also had side effects (basically we would tip the balance back in favor of effectiveness over safety). While it would always be ideal to have a drug that worked perfectly without side effects, it is always better to have a drug that works than one that doesn’t. You can always choose to not take a drug because of the side effects, but if the drug is not sold then you don’t have a choice.
Phase III drug trials compare new drugs to the best available treatment, not just placebo.
There are also huge classes of drugs that are obviously effective and beneficial (pain killers/nsaids, antihistamines, blood pressure medications, antibiotics,).
I took so many pointless medications over the years. When I was younger, I just figured if the drug/devise was FDA approved; it must be efficient? I was wrong!