“The Food and Drug Administration approved a daily pill on Thursday that can lower cholesterol levels far below what can be achieved with statins, the cheap cholesterol-reducing pills.

The drug, enlicitide, whose brand name is Lipfendra, is made by the pharmaceutical company Merck. Clinical trials have shown that it can bring levels of LDL — the dangerous type of cholesterol — down to 50 or 60 or even lower. Adults not taking cholesterol-lowering drugs usually have levels above 100. It works by inhibiting a protein known as PCSK9.

New cholesterol guidelines issued by the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology say that people who have an above-average risk of heart attacks or strokes should get their LDL levels below 70. Those at high risk because, for example, they have had a heart attack, should get their LDL below 55.

Lipfendra’s list price will be $315 for a 30-day supply, and it will be available in a few weeks, said a Merck spokeswoman, Julie Cunningham.

There are currently injectable drugs that work in the same way, but they are more expensive, with list prices of $500 to $600 a month or more. Insurers sometimes balk at paying, and some patients do not want injections. Only 1 percent of the six million eligible patients use the injected drugs. Yet a PCSK9 inhibitor can reduce the risk of heart attacks by 20 percent in high-risk patients.

Cardiologists not associated with Merck applauded the F.D.A. approval and the drug’s price. The hope is that a pill that costs less than an injectable and is easier to take will allow many more patients to get their cholesterol levels under control.”

From New York Times.

“In a long-awaited step, the European Parliament yesterday passed a law that allows the expedited approval of many gene-edited crops without the rigorous review required for traditional transgenic varieties…

Scientists and seed companies hope the law will lead to faster adoption of crops with improved disease resistance, heat tolerance, and nutrition…

Under the rules, as finalized this week, approval will be faster for crops whose gene edit seems modest enough that it could have been made through conventional breeding—a simple base change in an existing gene, for example, rather than the addition a nonplant gene. Stricter oversight will remain for transgenic engineering or more substantial gene editing.”

From Science.

“The next apartment complex, shopping center or mixed-use development built in North Carolina may look a little different.

A new bill signed by Gov. Josh Stein eliminates mandatory parking minimums for most new developments, giving builders more flexibility in deciding how many parking spaces to provide.

For decades, local governments could require developers to build a minimum number of parking spaces based on the size and type of a project. Beginning Jan. 1, that decision will largely be left to developers and market demand.

When new apartment communities, shopping centers and mixed-use developments are built, developers — rather than local zoning regulations — will determine how much parking is needed.”

From Yahoo News.

“For many, economic growth and environmental protection exist in direct tension. People with this belief generate policy proposals to permit growth while protecting the environment. For others, the tension is irremediable — they believe growth necessarily destroys. For these zealots, degrowth is the only way. For both groups, liberalizing the economy — allowing for more economic growth — carries at least a risk of environmental degradation.

In recent work with Justin Callais and Alicia Plemmons, published in Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, we show that there is no reason to worry. We used 49 cases of sustained economic liberalization since 1970 and measured their effects on outcomes such as death rates from air pollution, total greenhouse gas emissions, as well as emissions per capita and per dollar of economic output. In this context, liberalization refers to the adoption of policies that promote international trade, secure property rights, and lessen fiscal and regulatory burdens.

Comparing with similar countries that did not liberalize, we found that while GDP per capita increased 16 percent within ten years for liberalizers, environmental outcomes did not deteriorate. In fact, we found that death rates from air pollution declined modestly, while there were no effects of liberalization on total greenhouse emissions. Moreover, post-2000 liberalizers actually showed signs of lower emissions per dollar of economic activity and capita.

In other words, pro-growth policies are not in tension with environmental preservation.”

From The Daily Economy.