Under your scenario you will be targeted by extremely sophisticated psy-ops (think cambridge analytica *1000) to convince you that the super-snake-oil 2xt is the absolute best cure for your disease. Don't let the gov't tell you any different. Just look at this incredibly misleading data.
That is indeed a risk factor. I've seen a lot of people argue that there's no downside, that shoving the FDA out of the way would be a pure positive, and you're right to consider that very naive.
But should we expect the FDA itself to be immune to such manipulations?
Your confidence is misplaced. I mean look at those nigerian scams, they nab people every day and they are the worst in terms of efficacy. Now up the monetary incentive to BILLIONS of dollars, and remove the FDA, and you will find extremely sophisticated players entering the game. I really don't know where you derive your "zero" number from, but I'm guessing you are thinking it will have no effect on YOU. I actually help run clinical trials and regularly advise on clinical trial read-outs, and I can assure you that I could be fooled by a sophisticated scam if I didn't have a governmental entity that can and will actually do inspections and their own investigations with the power of criminal penalty. I think your confidence is entirely misplaced.
> I mean look at those nigerian scams, they nab people every day and they are the worst in terms of efficacy.
That seems like a bad example to support your point. Nigerian scammers don't strike at random like lightning. If you aren't really stupid or really greedy, there is zero chance that you'll get scammed by those guys. They target people with poor cognitive abilities and people who are greedy enough to think they can scam the scammers.
They run dragnets looking for the rare individuals who vulnerable to their scheme. They are powerless if tasked to target a specific person unless that specific person by chance happens to be the sort of person their scheme works on.
