"Any doctor will admit that any drug can have side effects, and that writing a prescription involves weighing the potential benefits against the risks"
About this Quote
Udall reaches for the language of the clinic because it smuggles political judgment into a frame that sounds nonpartisan, even inevitable. Doctors are trusted arbiters of risk; prescriptions are routine acts of responsible caution. By borrowing that authority, he positions whatever policy fight he is in - usually health care regulation, drug safety, or public-health tradeoffs - as something that should be evaluated like medicine: soberly, empirically, and case by case.
The intent is defensive and preemptive. He concedes the obvious (side effects happen) to block the more destabilizing claim (therefore the drug is bad, or the system is corrupt). It is a classic inoculation strategy: acknowledge risk so opponents can’t weaponize it as a gotcha. Then he pivots to the real argument: the act of choosing is not reckless; it is precisely what competent professionals do.
The subtext is a rebuke to absolutism. Udall is telling the listener that “zero risk” is a fantasy sold by ideologues and headline writers. If you demand perfection, you end up with paralysis - and paralysis has costs, too. In a polarized climate, the quote also serves as a quiet plea for procedural legitimacy: trust the process, trust expertise, accept that governance (like medicine) is triage under uncertainty.
Contextually, it’s the rhetoric of pragmatic liberalism in an era of pharmaceutical controversy: benefits aren’t denied, harms aren’t erased, and the moral high ground is claimed by the person willing to do the hard math out loud.
The intent is defensive and preemptive. He concedes the obvious (side effects happen) to block the more destabilizing claim (therefore the drug is bad, or the system is corrupt). It is a classic inoculation strategy: acknowledge risk so opponents can’t weaponize it as a gotcha. Then he pivots to the real argument: the act of choosing is not reckless; it is precisely what competent professionals do.
The subtext is a rebuke to absolutism. Udall is telling the listener that “zero risk” is a fantasy sold by ideologues and headline writers. If you demand perfection, you end up with paralysis - and paralysis has costs, too. In a polarized climate, the quote also serves as a quiet plea for procedural legitimacy: trust the process, trust expertise, accept that governance (like medicine) is triage under uncertainty.
Contextually, it’s the rhetoric of pragmatic liberalism in an era of pharmaceutical controversy: benefits aren’t denied, harms aren’t erased, and the moral high ground is claimed by the person willing to do the hard math out loud.
Quote Details
| Topic | Health |
|---|
More Quotes by Mark
Add to List
