The FDA restricts the stocks its employees can own, but what about stocks from which FDA employees can derive indirect but very real benefits - such as stocks FDA employees' spouses can own. Take for example, the FDA director's husband, who manages a large hedge fund that owns stocks of companies that have drugs often reviewed by the FDA or that have drugs on the market (or being developed) that are in direct competition with drugs of other companies that are being reviewed by the FDA. The derived benefit can be very real for the director. For example, (director husband to director): dear, you know that NDA that you are currently looking at, well that drug could potentially put drug X produced by company Y out of business. It would be nice for investors of my hedge fund, if that NDA received a CRL asking for additional studies so my investors will continue to pay me (us) money for a little while longer - never mind that doing so may lead to the firing of several good folks at the company submitting the NDA. These conflicts of interest should not be allowed, especially at the director level. Isn't it a basic rule of economics and politics that people act in their own self best interests? See tragety of the commons.