I wear hearing aids selected by an audiologist, have probably had some extra damage to my hearing from them, and wish I could buy open hearing aids I could program myself. I don't blame the system for the damage, but do for the restricted choice.
Generally consumer protection by regulation seems to suffer from a form of regulatory capture -- measures that are great at entrenching the existing players get disproportionate emphasis. You end up e.g. restricting the supply of doctors and then not bothering to make them wash their hands. I'm not saying regulation can't ever do net good, but you have to watch it like a hawk, and who has the incentive to?
> Generally consumer protection by regulation seems to suffer from a form of regulatory capture ...
I've heard these theories a lot, but I almost never see much evidence; is there any evidence it applies in this situation?
> doctors
I think it's very important to regulate doctors and medical care. I don't want any quack hanging out a shingle and treating people. The same goes for medical devices.
Generally consumer protection by regulation seems to suffer from a form of regulatory capture -- measures that are great at entrenching the existing players get disproportionate emphasis. You end up e.g. restricting the supply of doctors and then not bothering to make them wash their hands. I'm not saying regulation can't ever do net good, but you have to watch it like a hawk, and who has the incentive to?