FDA Ruling Smells Fishy

All folks following the CCSVI story will have heard the news about the FDA ruling concerning the "danger" and "lack of evidence for the utility" of the treatment. Sounds like an argument that Big Pharma and some scared neurologist/researchers were using two years ago: you'd think that they'd making it sound like it wasn't written by the same scriptwriters.  After all, tens of thousands have been treated with no more complications than could be expected from normal angioplasty and venoplasty, which is done every day to treat other conditions.  The "lack of evidence of efficacy" is because the big studies haven't come in yet.  It would be interesting if a good journalist would follow up on this to find out how this strange ruling came about.  Maybe then we'd find out more about the mechanisms and FDA officials that allow dangerous drugs on the market simply because they have the backing of big drug companies.