Context: Ben Goldacre has argued that regulators – such as the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the UK, or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States – advance the interests of the drug companies rather than the interests of the public due to revolving door exchange of employees between the regulator and the companies and friendships develop between regulator and company employees. He argues that regulators do not require that new drugs offer an improvement over what is already available, or even that they be particularly effective.

Question: Who argued against regulators?
Answer: Ben Goldacre

Question: Who argued that drug regulators were greater serving the interests of the drug companies than the patients?
Answer: Ben Goldacre

Question: The business friendships between which parties have been criticized?
Answer: regulator and company employees

Question: Goldacre argued that which party didn't require that new drugs be improved at all?
Answer: regulators

Question: Who argued against the public?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question: Who argued that drug regulators were greater serving the interests of patients than the drug companies?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question: The business friendships between which parties have been praised?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question: The FDA argued that which party didn't require that new drugs be improved at all?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question: Who argues that regulators do not require that new regulators offer an improvement?
Answer: Unanswerable