Patients Have a Right To Try. Why Can't They Use It?

The article frames regulatory barriers as an obstruction to individual autonomy, centering patient agency and questioning government enforcement—a libertarian-inflected critique. Word choice ('promised,' 'exists mostly on paper') emphasizes unfulfilled commitments and structural failure rather than safety rationales. Sources likely lean toward patient advocacy, medical professionals critical of FDA restrictions, and legal scholars; regulatory justifications are presumably included for balance but positioned as obstacles.

Primary voices: patient advocate or civil society, medical professional or academic expert, elected official or legal scholar, state or recognized government

• This article does not address documented cases where right-to-try access resulted in serious adverse events or deaths
• This article does not explain the FDA's safety-based rationale for expanded access requirements in detail