Trump-era FDA moves to sideline expert drug reviews, raising alarm

The FDA under President Trump is phasing out public expert panels that review new drugs, replacing them with internal evaluations and selective scientific panels.

Why it matters: Critics warn this shift could reduce transparency, weaken scientific scrutiny, and centralize power, potentially allowing unvetted or controversial drugs to be approved with less oversight.

Backstory: Since 1972, FDA advisory committees have played a key role in drug approvals by publicly reviewing evidence and providing expert votes. While not binding, their recommendations often guided FDA decisions and informed the public. Some of these committees have been replaced with closed-door meetings favoring the current administration's positions.

Zoom in: FDA advisory meetings have dropped in frequency as there have only been 7 advisory meetings since Trump returned, down from 22 during the same period last year. Considering how highly esteemed these meetings were, this could be a concern for both the FDA and US consumers. This is shown by a 2023 study that found the FDA followed 97% of “yes” votes and 67% of “no” votes from its advisory committees.

Big picture: This change is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to reshape regulatory processes, raising concerns about scientific integrity and public accountability in health decisions. Replacing these panels with handpicked experts may signal a move toward more politicized, less transparent governance.

What’s next: Along with the drop in meeting frequency, the FDA now releases previously confidential “complete response letters” when rejecting drugs, claiming it offers similar transparency. However, this does contradict the view of former FDA officials that advisory meetings uncover key insights and enable irreplaceable public participation. This could likely contribute to both a lack of oversight and increased risk for the future US pharmaceutical supply.