House ‘right to try’ law passes, sent to Senate: What it could mean for fragile patients

right to try
Image credit: Francesco Ridolfi, Getty Images

The US House of Representatives passed a federal “right-to-try” bill [March 21], leaving many Americans wondering what the move could mean for their health and that of their loved ones.

The central question, however, remains: Would a federal right-to-try bill help or hurt some of the country’s most fragile patients?

Right-to-try advocates argue that by bypassing FDA permission, patients can save even more time.

The right-to-try bill would be different from the FDA’s current expanded-access policies, as the current policies require patients to apply for access, [said Starlee Coleman, senior policy adviser at the Goldwater Institute a conservative public policy think tank based in Phoenix that supports right-to-try legislation]. “This law eliminates the application requirements to the FDA,” she said.

Supporters of right-to-try argue that the legislation is needed because most terminal patients are too sick to be selected to participate in clinical trials and it takes too long for promising treatments to be approved.

[Dr. Steven Joffe, professor in medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine] argued that the right-to-try approach to providing access to unapproved drugs early in their development could put patients in harm’s way, as patients receiving the drug are often in very fragile health, doctors often lack the information needed to administer the drugs safely, and little may be known about their risks and benefits, he said.

Read full, original post: What you need to know about right-to-try legislation

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Jun-23-2026-03_12_23-PM
Is cellular reprogramming junk science? Nearly 20 patients are getting eye injections in the first FDA-cleared cellular trial
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-24-2026-11_36_47-AM
Why the human genome is less a script than a puzzle
Screenshot-2026-06-15-at-1.55.27-PM
America's trust in Trump-Kennedy's CDC health recommendations is plunging
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-25-2026-12_23_17-PM
No, Bill Gates did not secretly engineer ticks to promote veganism
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-17-2026-10_52_43-AM
Anguished parents, doctors in tears: Utah’s long measles outbreak takes a toll
Screenshot 2026-06-25 at 10.55
Leading OB-GYN group challenges RFK, Jr. gutting of maternal vaccine schedule
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-06-22-at-9.04.46-PM
Kennedy's nutrition prescription for medical schools: Real problem, bad cure
Screenshot-2026-06-24-at-2.57.41-PM
Viewpoint: Trump’s Reflecting Pool algae fiasco points to a bigger culprit: Climate change
Screenshot-2026-06-25-at-1.48.40-PM
Glyphosate affirmed as safe: Supreme Court rejects lawsuit claiming Roundup herbicide causes cancer, upholding EPA determination
Screenshot-2026-06-24-at-2.40.46-PM
Hegseth reversal: As Air Force flu outbreak continues to surge, military reinstitutes mandatory vaccines for recruits

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.