However... It is a Ferrari in a market that doesn't give a shit about Ferrari. It is priced accordingly.
I'd like to disagree. There are plenty of similarly priced brands on the market (or even much more expensive like R+S in Germany; their Homage model is roughly double the price of a Vanmoof S5) that absolutely thrive. Vanmoof bikes are nice, but the only thing that really sets them apart is their unique design. The other manufacturers have bikes that offer similar comfort and features, but use of-the-shelves components that can be repaired or replaced in any bike shop. They also sell in any bike shop; Vanmoof was much more exclusive/harder to buy. Vanmoof used proprietary parts that you couldn't get anywhere (they didn't even sell them; your only option was to get your bike serviced at the handful of Vanmoof service stations). Their proprietary components gave them a serious disadvantage during the supply chain disruptions (other manufacturers could quickly change to alternative components that were actually available and keep producing). Their quality control problems with the S3 line (requiring expensive repairs at service stations, often hundreds of kilometers away from their customers) put a serious damper on the brand (both in brand value and in production: every component used to repair an existing bike can't be used to produce a new bike). These problems combined lead to a many months long backlog, additionally stopping people from buying a Vanmoof.
There are people willing to experiment with these drugs because they are running out of options. But the FDA will not allow it because the drugs have not yet been proven effective.
You're either horribly misinformed or trying to push an agenda. Compassionate exceptions and entries into experimental trials are routine. "I'm dying and the guy in the labcoat has a possible cure but isn't allowed to give it to me" is not a realistic scenario.
What does it take to prove a drug is effective? People have to take the drug and the results need to be documented.
This is a catch-22 that the FDA created for themselves and there is no way to break it but to remove this nonsensical policy enacted because an unsafe drug came to market.
There's no catch-22; that's what drug trials are for. You don't just throw drugs around like candy and see what happens.
You're actually arguing that effectiveness shouldn't be a criteria for drug approval?! So as long as I can prove that my sugar cube isn't directly harmful, I can sell it as a cancer cure, thereby preventing people from seeking out actual working medicine?
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. -- Albert Einstein