economist and professor geeking out on biomedical technologies, FDA, conflicts of interest, med ethics, and government ethics

Univ of Southern California
Joined December 2018
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
I think this is a hugely important point about the clinical trial prediction market concept. However, my personal 2c: rather than depress trial enrollment, I think this could be misused to falsely drive trial enrollment (by driving up price to imply insiders believe drug works)
Prediction Markets in Clinical Trials and @FDA Drug Approval via @ProfGenKanter jamanetwork.com/journals/jam…
1
2
4
1,749
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Prediction Markets in Clinical Trials and @FDA Drug Approval via @ProfGenKanter jamanetwork.com/journals/jam…
4
1
11
2,765
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Replying to @Health_Affairs
@Health_Affairs Scholar provides a high-quality outlet for your research: speed, reach, and relevance!
1
1
90
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Every college syllabus should include these graphs. Use AI for homework, you will get it done faster and get a higher grade, and then get crushed on the exam.
297
1,689
297
12,675
1,143,049
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Long Post: What’s going on with these so-called Complete Response Letters (CRLs)? There’s long been strong public and investor interest in CRLs, the letters the FDA issues to companies explaining exactly why a drug application (deficiencies in safety, efficacy, manufacturing, ...). FDA launched a major “radical transparency” push in 2025 under then-Commissioner Marty Makary. In July 2025 the agency released more than 200 CRLs, mostly for previously approved applications. In September 2025 it announced real-time or prompt public release of newly issued CRLs (including for pending or withdrawn or unapproved applications) and released another batch of 89. Some real-time style releases followed before the later pause. Industry pushback followed, including a citizen petition filed on April 20, 2026 (by Covington & Burling on behalf of an unnamed pharmaceutical company). The petition raised concerns about process, redactions, and legal authority for disclosing CRLs tied to unapproved applications. FDA reportedly paused new real-time releases around April 2026. An HHS spokesperson later confirmed the temporary pause while the agency evaluates next steps. The agency is now moving to formalize and expand the policy through rulemaking under RIN 0910-AJ16 (“Proactive Disclosure of Complete Response Letters”). On the roughly 9–18 month timeframe: This is a realistic ballpark based on how federal rulemaking usually works. From an NPRM (expected October 2026) you typically get a public comment period (often 30–60 days), agency review of comments, internal clearances (including OIRA review for significant rules), and final publication. Many rules take 6–12+ months from proposal to final rule, and complex or contested ones can stretch longer, sometimes well over a year. That’s standard across agencies and described in guides such as the Federal Register’s overview of the rulemaking process. Key links: Proposed rule (Unified Agenda): reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgend… Citizen petition (April 20, 2026): regulations.gov/document/FDA… openFDA CRL database: open.fda.gov/apis/transparen… This is what I have gathered so far from public sources and reporting. It is not an exhaustive deep dive. Things can move or change once the NPRM is published in October.
3
3
1
8
5,145
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
RIP Ned Phelps Ned Phelps followed his own intellectual journey. When Keynesians relied on a long-run tradeoff between unemployment and inflation, he showed why this was a weak reed to stand on. Thus was born the natural rate hypothesis (although the coining of the word goes to Friedman, a year after Ned’s paper). When, later, New Keynesians were focusing on nominal rigidities, he built models of fluctuations where nominal rigidities played no role. When New Classicals were exploring the cyclical implications of competitive markets, he focused on the role of distortions in goods and labor markets, be it efficiency wages, or variable markups. It would be fair to say that, today, the frontier macro models embody the natural rate hypothesis, and many of the distortions Ned focus on---and, what he did not like, i.e. nominal rigidities. His style was highly idiosyncratic. He was often a poor expositor of his fundamental insights. He did not listen much to others, pursuing his agenda with focus and passion. But, to use an overused but appropriate expression, he was certainly one of the giants in the field. We often met and sometimes fought, be it on hysteresis or nominal rigidities, but I had infinite respect for him.
5
162
12
495
113,581
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
David Lim@davidalimMay 12
SCOOP: FDA Commissioner Marty Makary is resigning from the agency. Kyle Diamantas, who previously worked as the top food official at the agency, will lead the FDA in an acting capacity. w/ @Gardner_LM: subscriber.politicopro.com/a…
28
180
44
405
365,736
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
📰 𝗔 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗵𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸𝗲𝗻𝗱. A worthwhile read this weekend, and one I wanted to share with my network. Medscape — "The Unprecedented Rise of Scientists Fact-Checking the Feds." A few points from the article worth pausing on: — Public trust in the CDC, FDA and NIH has fallen in double digits since 2024 — Yet 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗨𝗦 𝗮𝗱𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝘀𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁 (Pew, January 2026) — In February, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued its own immunisation schedule, departing from recent CDC changes — Independent research committees are being formed to protect the integrity of scientific work Read the Article: medscape.com/viewarticle/unp… 🎙 The article covers a topic I was widely quoted on earlier in the year and discussed in 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘁 𝗢𝗯𝘀𝘁𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘀, 𝗚𝘆𝗻𝗮𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 & 𝗪𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻'𝘀 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵 podcast: "𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗺𝗼𝗹 𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝘆". 🎧 Listen on Apple: apple.co/4sY7WTh 🎧 Listen on Spotify: bit.ly/4brIwru #EvidenceBasedMedicine #ClinicalResearch #ScienceCommunication #Healthcare #WomensHealth #Pregnancy #PublicHealth #PerinatalHealth @TheLancet @MedscapeObGyn @Medscape The Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology, & Women’s Health Medscape
🤖 Made with AI
2
9
354
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
A widely used knee surgery may not just be ineffective — it may cause harm. 10-year results from the FIDELITY trial, now in @NEJM. 🧵 – at Helsinki, Finland
15
59
7
185
79,858
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
The Trump administration has downsized US science by historic margins — but it's not just via grant or workforce cuts. Our new @nature analysis reveals the government has cut more than 100 scientific advisory panels across all major science agencies.
97
1,009
95
1,724
310,845
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
excited to present this @USC_Econ today! (a tweet thread/substack version coming soon)
5
39
3
556
44,854
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
If Trump's proposed $6B cut to NIH were enacted in FY27, the NIH estimates that the number of new research grants would drop **47%** officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/pd…
3
21
1
25
6,565
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
BREAKING: In response to huge cuts in Trump's budget request, NSF is closing its social sciences directorate. Staff will be transferred elsewhere in NSF, and "grants that align with Administration priorities" will be kept. W/ @dangaristo for @Nature nature.com/articles/d41586-0…
36
458
77
817
386,556
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Negativity is more viral, but the new Nature studies don’t mean social science is wrong or uninformative. It’s fine if there are errors in papers. Genetic mutation has a beneficial rate of <1%, but evolution is monstrously effective. High error rates are ok if you have a process that is robust to high error rates. Many science papers have always been wrong, but they get retested and overturned. The same thing happens in social science— most papers don’t get replicated but that’s because nobody cares about their results. When stuff is important, it does get tested and retested and the literature builds toward correct answers. It’s ok to have a moderate error rate because papers are not sacred texts. What matters more is whether you have institutions where errors can be found and overturned. This is the real test of institutional quality. And we’re around the corner from AI making us much better at this, esp in the fields with open data standards.
8
18
3
117
29,812
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Great article from @bencasselman this morning on how thinking around AI and labor markets has evolved over the last year and change, featuring @danielrock @alexolegimas @Mollykinder @akorinek @robseamans and others. Read the whole thing - but I wanted to expand on this point: 1/
3
21
1
64
16,948
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Fascinating!
Paul Mohnen showing that Social Security paid for itself by favoring better job matches geographically. Very counterintuitive at first but utterly prior-shattering @Masonomics
5
51
2
366
39,234
Genevieve Kanter, PhD retweeted
Data and Code Availability by Field: Poli Sci and Econ are crushing it (ok, only relative to the other social sciences, it should be 100%). Replicability problems will shrink dramatically in the disciplines with open data, as AI will soon be quickly validate all the papers.
1
10
4
64
16,409