Apr 12 • 26M

Ep. 46 - Dueling Rulings

What a judge's decision on mifepristone means for the FDA

 
1×
0:00
-25:39
Open in playerListen on);
    Substack App
    Download MP3
    Get a private RSS link for listening
    Subscribe to The FLATLINING Podcast to get a private link for listening in your favorite podcast player. Learn about RSS.

Appears in this episode

Matthew Handley
Ron Howrigon
The FLATLINING Podcast brings you great healthcare analysis and discussion each week from industry experts who know their way around politics, economics, and a doctors office. Subscribe for more great content and check out the articles at www.FLATLINING.net.
Episode details
Comments
brown wooden stand with black background
Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

This week on the FLATLINING Podcast, Ron and Matthew discuss two recent judicial decisions that contradict. A judge in Texas ruled that mifepristone, the drug used for over half of all abortions in the United States, should lose its approval status from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Then, on the same day, a judge in Washington ruled that the FDA needs to make the drug more widely available and stop some of its restrictions and warnings.

What do these decisions mean for drug manufacturers and the independent practice of medicine?

Plus: California backs off of Walgreens and CMS throws some pennies at hospitals.

Share

Subscribe to the FLATLINING Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the iHeartRadio app, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Pandora, TuneIn, and Audible.

Articles mentioned in this episode:

6 burning questions about how the FDA will handle conflicting abortion pill decisions - STAT

Newsom wanted California to cut ties with Walgreens. Then federal law got in way - Desert Sun

Hospitals get a slight pay boost - Axios

Share