Is the FDA obsolete?
How can Underwriter Laboratories work so much faster to "approve" electrical devices as safe? It's because they are relied on by insurance companies that are insuring the liability of the products. Their incentive is to find any safety issues before a consumer sues over it.
Millions of people every year in the U.S. suffer from not having drugs sooner. Who is taking their suffering into account when following the current FDA process for drug approvals?
Worried about drug testing results in an FDA-less country?
Require companies to post an insurance bond to pay possible claims if the drug turns out to be bad. Insist on a transparent process via a third-party provider that is sufficiently underwritten, just like current insurance underwriting works.
At that point, people and Doctors can compare how much that third-party provider charged the drug company to insure the drug and do a quick proxy risk calculation accordingly.
If a company can make a convincing case that their drug is safe enough to avoid claims to their insurer, then it'll be a quick approval process and be on the market quickly.
If it's a dubious and/or highly risky drug, their insurer is going to be incentivized to either require a lot of extra honest studies to prove it's safe or pay a lot more money to offset the risk of claims.
If you insist on government involvement in the drug market, at least align the incentives for the participants with something more useful than the FDA's current "Don't ever approve a drug that has any chance of harm, no matter how much good it would do!"
"Every drug for cancer and other serious life-threatening illnesses that the Abigail Alliance has pushed for earlier access to in our eight-year history is now approved by the FDA! There is not one drug that we pushed for earlier access to that did not make it through the clinical trial process. Many lives could have been saved or extended, if there had been earlier access to these drugs!"
-Frank Burroughs, Founder of the Abigail Alliance