Plan B - The Subvergence of Science

So it turns out that the GAO performed a wee investigation as to why the hell the FDA didn't let Plan B be sold OTC.

Federal health officials didn't follow normal procedures in rejecting over-the-counter sales of the morning-after pill - and some documents suggest the decision was made even before scientists finished reviewing the evidence, congressional investigators reported Monday.

Politics trumped science, immediately charged long-suspicious members of Congress who had requested the independent audit.

[snip]

In December 2003, FDA's scientific advisers overwhelmingly backed over-the-counter sales for all ages, citing assessments that easier access could halve the nation's 3 million annual unintended pregnancies.

[YEAY]

But the following May, FDA leaders rejected that recommendation, citing concern about young teens' use of the pills without a doctor's guidance.

BOO. So why would the FDA curb its scientific advisors, and not want to save 1.5 million unborn baby lives each year? They must hate America or babies, or perhaps both.

The independent Government Accountability Office reviewed FDA's first rejection, uncovering what they called "unusual" decision-making. Among the findings:

_Conflicting accounts of whether the decision was made months before scientific reviews were completed.

_Unusual involvement from high-ranking agency officials.

_Three FDA directors who normally would have been responsible for signing off on the decision did not do so because they disagreed with it.

WHOOPS. Looks like the typical pattern these days. Some sort of conflicting account about when and where the decision was made, followed by unusual involvement from high-ranking officials. Followed by dissent among folsk who would normally have been signing off on these types of decisions.

Can we get the GAO to investigate the Iraq War, you know just to quelch all that talk about Democrats "rewriting history." For more history revisionism see here then here.