Trump likened the FDA’s approach to “Right to Try,” an approach championed by conservatives and libertarians that allows for patients with fatal illnesses to be treated with unapproved therapies. The key difference between “Right to Try” and FDA’s compassionate use is that doctors, patients and drug companies that participate don’t need to get the FDA to approve the individual course of treatment.

The “Right to Try” law signed by Trump in May 2018 came after years of opposition by the pharmaceutical industry, which was afraid that more liberal distribution of experimental drugs outside of controlled clinical trials could result in lawsuits or make it harder to win FDA approval if a patient’s condition did not improve or there were adverse side effects.

The final law provided protections for participating drug companies. But since it was implemented, there have been only a handful of instances of “Right to Try” being used, and most drug companies prefer to use the FDA’s compassionate use process. The agency says it typically approves the vast majority of requests expeditiously.

And the “Right to Try” policy was intended by lawmakers as a last resort for patients with a rare, lethal disease. Epidemiologists project that as much as 70 percent of the U.S. population could eventually be infected with the novel coronavirus, making the circumvention of typical safety standards more risky.

Hahn appeared to walk back the idea that “Right to Try” was the FDA’s desired approach in this case, arguing that the FDA needed the patient use data to make an informed decision about whether the drugs would ultimately be safe and effective for the broader population.