Seems wrong, FDA has the task of regulating (bio)chemicals (which can be extremely deadly on mass scales, even with relatively little effort just by getting an existing pathogen and letting biology do its thing, but have a wide range of small increments of badness/goodness, and are often fairly hard to tell if will be good or bad because our preferences about chemical outcomes are complex and chemicals have complex interactions), whereas IAEA has the task of regulating nuclear energy (which can be extremely deadly on mass scales but has a much higher minimum bar to entry, and is actually pretty hard to turn into a weapon of mass destruction, and makes a lot of very detectable noise on certain kinds of instruments when someone tries).
Don’t compare to FDA, compare to IAEA.
Seems wrong, FDA has the task of regulating (bio)chemicals (which can be extremely deadly on mass scales, even with relatively little effort just by getting an existing pathogen and letting biology do its thing, but have a wide range of small increments of badness/goodness, and are often fairly hard to tell if will be good or bad because our preferences about chemical outcomes are complex and chemicals have complex interactions), whereas IAEA has the task of regulating nuclear energy (which can be extremely deadly on mass scales but has a much higher minimum bar to entry, and is actually pretty hard to turn into a weapon of mass destruction, and makes a lot of very detectable noise on certain kinds of instruments when someone tries).