72 comments 18X the amount of the average number of comments since 1998 which is 4. The comment review period for those 15 drugs since 1998 ranged from 19 days to 43 days. There was one outlier at about 88 days a few years back.
Thus get your head out of that thing you sit on. It is not the same as responding to stupid message board comments since you have to for substantive comments have to provide detailed questions. In addition, someone may have requested a hearing, that adds to the time.
Not defending the DEA, but maybe those who commented and the 'one that cannot be named' who urged people to comment and the 'one that cannot be named' commented at least 2 times and maybe 3 times and it is said he tried to comment again but was closed out. What was 'he who cannot be named thinking'? He wasn't he is a loose cannon who went out of control and then after AF's article mentioning him in the article with regards to the comment period, well that alerted additional bashers to start commenting and 'the one that cannot be named' felt he had to respond to those comments only creating more responses to his comments.
Now that you have the straight story and the correct number of comments and understand it is not as simple as we would like it to be, then maybe there is one person we can focus our frustrations on, except the 'the one that cannot be named' won't accept any blame he continues to state that he had to respond to the bashers.
He did this knowing and being told by people that work at Arena, that less comments were better. I heard that message and did not respond and did not feel the need to respond even to a basher. BTW, a good number of those comments came in the last 10 days or less of the comment period.
Yes, 18X the number of the average comments for the last 15 drugs scheduled since 1998! The main difference between those 15 drugs and Lorcaserin is that they had a lot less comments, thus their review periods took less time. 72 vs. 4 IRMC!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Amen to all you say, Jdsstevens. I wonder how many people who claim here that responding to the public comments is trivial have ever bothered to go to the DEA site and taken a good hard look at what's involved in putting them together. The comments might often be trivial, but all the responses have to be legally and/or scientifically appropriate. The fact of the matter is that, because of the duel between the ARNA and VVUS YMB boards conducted on the FR, the DEA is now dealing with what looks like a "controversy". And controversies need the input of higher level managers. Some of the people here need to put themselves in the position of the DEA. Whatever the response made, some members of "the public" are going to have their "helpful suggestions" rejected by the DEA. Given the tendency for disgruntled people to file lawsuits, the responses are going to need to be watertight. Think about it a little. We might all know that most of the comments were made by dingbats for purely selfish reasons, but the DEA cannot and will not assume that - it has to respond courteously and precisely to each and every US taxpayer who oh so kindly weighed in on this matter of grave concern to the public...
known as guilt by association. There is no evidence that the comments or anything else are responsible for the time gone by without DEA final scheduling. It is unlikely we will ever know why but it is what it is. I see no reason why they shouldn't have a timeline that removes uncertainty that does nothing but create havoc in the market and allow those interested in manipulating securities the opportunity to do so. Patients and doctors, tax payers and retail investors deserve transparency and accountability from government agencies. I'm wondering how many other drugs are currently before the DEA for scheduling. Given the history so often posted on this board I suspect not many if any. The process should be over by now and this drug available to those who need and would benefit from it.
A few comments were removed. There were 69. Also, almost all of the initial comments were positive. The negative ones waited until the end. Most involved the "combo" use with phen. Some were tripe "Can't wait to get high". One would think that the 22 negative ones could be dealt with easily. One would think.
We will have our "Day"
IMO, the only way 75 Days will be fair if the 30 Day Rule making to effective date is waived. 45 + 30 = 75 Days, and 45 days is about the right time it should have taken to respond to public comments.
Sentiment: Strong Buy