//periodicos.unisa.br/index.php/direitosaude/issue/feed 2026-04-02T11:24:54-03:00 Anna Catharina Machado Normanton acmnormanton@prof.unisa.br Open Journal Systems <p>The <strong data-start="545" data-end="619">Revista de Direito da Saúde Comparado (Comparative Health Law Journal)</strong> is an international electronic journal with a continuous submission system, featuring a <strong data-start="708" data-end="737">permanent call for papers</strong> and the organization of <strong data-start="762" data-end="785">two issues per year</strong>. Its purpose is to disseminate research and reflections by professors and researchers in the fields of Law and Health from around the world. The journal is organized within the Master’s Program in Medical Law at Universidade Santo Amaro.</p> <p>The journal’s mission is to promote the advancement of scientific and academic debate, as well as to widely disseminate high-quality research, both theoretical and empirical, on medical law, social fundamental health rights, and public health policies.</p> <p data-start="1791" data-end="2004">The journal follows a broad editorial scope and adopts rigorous criteria established by CAPES, with a <strong data-start="1893" data-end="1921">double-blind peer review</strong> process, ensuring impartiality in the evaluation of submitted and published works.</p> //periodicos.unisa.br/index.php/direitosaude/article/view/1162 2026-04-02T11:24:54-03:00 Eduardo Alvares de Carvalho eduardo.dsaude@gmail.com Alexandre Maulaz Barcelos alexandremaulazbarcelos@gmail.com Georghio Alessandro Tomelin gtomelin@gtomelin.com

<p>This article provides a comparative analysis of the phosphoethanolamine and polylaminin cases as paradigmatic expressions to nominate&nbsp; the “judicialization of hope” in Brazilian health law. Employing a qualitative and comparative methodological approach, the study examines the structural tension between therapeutic urgency, scientific validation, and health regulation, as well as the systemic impacts of judicial decisions granting access to experimental technologies within Brazil’s Unified Health System (SUS). The phosphoethanolamine episode is reconstructed to highlight the institutional rupture caused by legislative flexibilization and its subsequent constitutional containment by the Brazilian Supreme Court in ADI 5501. The contemporary controversy surrounding polylaminin is then analyzed in light of the Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudential framework, particularly Themes 6, 500, and 1234, and ADI 7265, which emphasize the centrality of regulatory approval, robust scientific evidence, and judicial deference to technical health authorities. The article argues that premature judicial authorization of experimental therapies may undermine distributive rationality, collective safety, and the financial sustainability of the public health system. It concludes that institutional maturity in the judicial review of the right to health requires reinforced epistemic justification and respect for regulatory safeguards as conditions for effective and sustainable fundamental rights protection.</p>

2026-04-02T00:00:00-03:00 Copyright (c) 2026 Comparative Health Law Journal