Prasad's resignationdeparture showsrepresents howa pharmaceuticalvictory lobbyingagainst andregulatory politicaloverreach pressurethat canthreatened underminepatient legitimateaccess safetyto concernslife-saving at the FDAtreatments. His evidence-baseddecision approach to drughalt approvalsElevidys andshipments willingnessignored todesperate questionfamilies treatmentsfighting withDuchenne questionablemuscular efficacydystrophy representedand exactlydemonstrated thedangerous kindgovernment ofinterference scientificin rigormedical the agency needsdecisions. The coordinatedWall attackStreet againstJournal himcorrectly prioritizedidentified industrythis profitsas overregulatory patient"mugging" safetythat chills pharmaceutical innovation.
Prasad's resignation shows how pharmaceutical lobbying and political pressure can undermine legitimate safety concerns at the FDA. His evidence-based approach to drug approvals and willingness to question treatments with questionable efficacy represented exactly the kind of scientific rigor the agency needs. The coordinated attack against him prioritized industry profits over patient safety.