The Freedom to Trade and Use Vaccines

Last Friday, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave Americans permission to receive Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. The FDA’s action came three weeks after the company submitted a request for Emergency Use Authorization. During those three weeks, nearly four million new COVID-19 cases were confirmed in the United States, and more than 40,000 Americans died from the virus.

The delay in approving the vaccine and the resulting deaths was caused by the FDA’s demand that drug companies prove that their products are safe and effective. A company’s own evaluation of its products isn’t sufficient. The government must give its stamp of approval. And while the bureaucratic process ambles along at a snail’s pace, people die.

The FDA’s approval process is founded on the premise that individuals—including doctors—are either too stupid or irrational to make wise choices regarding what to put into our bodies. And so, the government must prohibit us from taking drugs that might save our lives until it can give its stamp of approval.

Ostensibly, the FDA is protecting people from making foolish decisions. However, no government agency can stop fools from doing foolish things. For example, a survey conducted the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 4 percent of the respondents had either drank or gargled with bleach in an effort to combat the coronavirus. But we shouldn’t ban bleach because some fools drink it.

While the FDA is allegedly protecting fools, it is also preventing the rational from acting on their judgment. For example, without the FDA’s approval process, individuals could have chosen to take the vaccine weeks earlier. But they were denied that choice by government fiat. They were denied the freedom to purchase and use the products of their choosing, even when those products might save their lives.

When we need to government’s stamp of approval prior to taking action, we cannot act by right. We can only act by permission. We have a right to live as we think best, and that includes the freedom to receive a vaccine.

Similar Posts

  • The Roundup 10

    At The Objective Standard, Aaron Briley addresses the anti-American ideas underlying Black Lives Matter. Many seem to regard BLM as a humanitarian organization that fights on behalf of the downtrodden—as a nonviolent movement dedicated to protecting the rights of vulnerable citizens. However, this is not true. Founders and leaders of the organization advocate an ideology…

  • Abbott’s Consistency

    Like most of the nation’s governors, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott declared a state of emergency when the pandemic first started. He then promptly shut down much of the state’s economy in an effort to stop the spread of the coronavirus. A year later, Abbott was one of the first governors to remove mask mandates and…

  • |

    The Problem Isn’t Term Limits

    This was originally posted on Live Oaks on August 12, 2010. Comments have not been migrated. The Chronicle’s editorial on Wednesday again voiced opposition to term limits: We continue to believe they entail needless public cost for staging elections while denying the best officials the opportunity to continue serving the city. The system prevents citizens…

  • Friday Roundup 8-6-21

    Barry Fagin, a Senior Fellow at the Independence Institute in Denver, correctly notes that conservatives are very confused about the meaning of property rights. As examples, he cites Florida Gov. Rick DeSantis’ ban of “vaccine passports” and conservative calls to regulate social media companies like Facebook and Twitter. Fagin concludes that property rights have fallen…