FDA just lost a historic ivermectin lawsuit

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,590
2,357
113
.
so when will FDA officials be arrested and charged with manslaughter for denying lifesaving treatments to Americans?

--------------------------------------------------
During the covid-19 scandal, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) routinely interfered in the doctor-patient relationship, withheld life-saving information and suppressed efficacious treatments for covid-19 and other respiratory illnesses. In misleading the public, the FDA placed pressure on medical boards and waged war against doctors who effectively treated their patients for covid-19. One of the treatments prescribed by doctors – but demonized by the FDA – was ivermectin.

In a historic case, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division ruled against the FDA and struck down their war against ivermectin. As part of the settlement, the FDA agrees to take down website and social media posts that warn people not to use ivermectin to treat COVID-19. The defendants in the suit include U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and Dr. Robert Califf, acting FDA commissioner.

Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Robert Apter – three American heroes who fought back against the FDA’s bullying and censorship – proved to the court that the FDA acted outside of its authority. They were represented by Boyden, Gray & Associates.

Bowden, Marik and Apter proved that the FDA “unlawfully interfered” with doctors’ ability to practice medicine. The FDA directed the public, including health professionals and patients, not to use ivermectin – even though the medication is approved for human use by the FDA.

Advertisement
The ruling stops the FDA from acting as the ultimate authority over all doctors and medical professionals in the nation. FDA officials share a sleazy relationship with the pharmaceutical industry and favored certain drugs as a one-size-fits-all mandate for the entire medical system.

With this ruling, the FDA is no longer allowed to ban off-label use of particular drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. The agency is no longer allowed to advise patients to take approved drugs. The FDA should have listened to medical professionals who worked meticulously and tirelessly to treat covid-19 patients. Instead, the agency went to war against them and mocked and/or blacklisted their treatment protocols.
.....
Marik said the ruling, “is a major win because it’s saying that the FDA can approve drugs, but they can’t interfere with the patient-physician relationship.” “They can’t determine … what drugs physicians can and cannot prescribe,” he added.

Because of the FDA’s war on ivermectin, doctors lost their licensees, pharmacies refused to dispense ivermectin and immune-compromised patients were left with no efficacious treatment plan.....
--------------------------------------------------
.
 

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,590
2,357
113
“FDA has not changed its position that currently available clinical trial data do not demonstrate that ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. The agency has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19.”

I think the FDA's opinion of ivermectin's efficacy is wrong, but the FDA has a right to draw its opinion. However, the FDA's opinion about ivermectin's efficacy is not at issue in this case. As stated in the subject article, the case is about whether the FDA has a right to prevent licensed physicians from prescribing drugs which have been approved by the FDA.

The FDA lost.
.
 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,746
23,362
113
I think the FDA's opinion of ivermectin's efficacy is wrong, but the FDA has a right to draw its opinion. However, the FDA's opinion about ivermectin's efficacy is not at issue in this case. As stated in the subject article, the case is about whether the FDA has a right to prevent licensed physicians from prescribing drugs which have been approved by the FDA.

The FDA lost.
.
the FDA lost to a kangaroo court of activist judges from Squidlanistan.

you "think the FDA's opinion of ivermectin's efficacy is wrong"?

did the Conservative Treehouse convince you that Ivermectin was effective in fighting covid?

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

your medical opinions are about as valuable as your legal opinions
 

Clayster

Phil Edwards status
Oct 26, 2005
5,702
1,298
113
the FDA lost to a kangaroo court of activist judges from Squidlanistan.

you "think the FDA's opinion of ivermectin's efficacy is wrong"?

did the Conservative Treehouse convince you that Ivermectin was effective in fighting covid?

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

your medical opinions are about as valuable as your legal opinions
IF the judge was wrong, then they should appeal. But they didn't. What is your legal opinion about that?

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

I know from several physicians who are friends that they were put under enormous pressure to push the vaccines, including on children, and refuse to recommend or prescribe other alternatives such as ivermectin. They were threatened with losing their jobs, licenses and admitting privileges at hospitals, among other things.

During covid the gubmint and its various agencies blatantly trampled on constitutional rights/physician/ patient relationships, and the hippocratic oath, etc., etc.

Given the tens of billions of dollars big pharma stood to make, only a fool would think that they didn't grease plenty of palms,, particularly know that we know how many lies we were told.
 

ghost_of_lewis_samuels

Phil Edwards status
Oct 27, 2019
6,528
4,295
113
IF the judge was wrong, then they should appeal. But they didn't. What is your legal opinion about that?

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

I know from several physicians who are friends that they were put under enormous pressure to push the vaccines, including on children, and refuse to recommend or prescribe other alternatives such as ivermectin. They were threatened with losing their jobs, licenses and admitting privileges at hospitals, among other things.

During covid the gubmint and its various agencies blatantly trampled on constitutional rights/physician/ patient relationships, and the hippocratic oath, etc., etc.

Given the tens of billions of dollars big pharma stood to make, only a fool would think that they didn't grease plenty of palms,, particularly know that we know how many lies we were told.

what sort of pressure?

isn't Ivermectin also a big pharma product?
 

maybe

Michael Peterson status
Jul 23, 2011
2,403
1,234
113
Mikey J, it you want to be taken seriously, you can't be posting trash articles from a sh!t website.

What is 100percentfedup.com?
The website 100percentfedup.com operates as a platform disseminating propaganda, engaging in the dissemination of disinformation and biased content to manipulate public opinion. Its content may present misleading narratives, distort facts, or push specific political agendas.

Visitors to this site should exercise critical thinking and diligence in evaluating the information presented and cross-referencing it with reliable sources to discern the accuracy and credibility of the content. It is crucial for users to be aware of the potential for misinformation and to approach the site's content with a discerning and skeptical mindset.



.
so when will FDA officials be arrested and charged with manslaughter for denying lifesaving treatments to Americans?

--------------------------------------------------
During the covid-19 scandal, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) routinely interfered in the doctor-patient relationship, withheld life-saving information and suppressed efficacious treatments for covid-19 and other respiratory illnesses. In misleading the public, the FDA placed pressure on medical boards and waged war against doctors who effectively treated their patients for covid-19. One of the treatments prescribed by doctors – but demonized by the FDA – was ivermectin.

In a historic case, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division ruled against the FDA and struck down their war against ivermectin. As part of the settlement, the FDA agrees to take down website and social media posts that warn people not to use ivermectin to treat COVID-19. The defendants in the suit include U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and Dr. Robert Califf, acting FDA commissioner.

Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Robert Apter – three American heroes who fought back against the FDA’s bullying and censorship – proved to the court that the FDA acted outside of its authority. They were represented by Boyden, Gray & Associates.

Bowden, Marik and Apter proved that the FDA “unlawfully interfered” with doctors’ ability to practice medicine. The FDA directed the public, including health professionals and patients, not to use ivermectin – even though the medication is approved for human use by the FDA.

Advertisement
The ruling stops the FDA from acting as the ultimate authority over all doctors and medical professionals in the nation. FDA officials share a sleazy relationship with the pharmaceutical industry and favored certain drugs as a one-size-fits-all mandate for the entire medical system.

With this ruling, the FDA is no longer allowed to ban off-label use of particular drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. The agency is no longer allowed to advise patients to take approved drugs. The FDA should have listened to medical professionals who worked meticulously and tirelessly to treat covid-19 patients. Instead, the agency went to war against them and mocked and/or blacklisted their treatment protocols.
.....
Marik said the ruling, “is a major win because it’s saying that the FDA can approve drugs, but they can’t interfere with the patient-physician relationship.” “They can’t determine … what drugs physicians can and cannot prescribe,” he added.

Because of the FDA’s war on ivermectin, doctors lost their licensees, pharmacies refused to dispense ivermectin and immune-compromised patients were left with no efficacious treatment plan.....
--------------------------------------------------
.
 

LipService

OTF status
Feb 10, 2017
251
257
63
During covid, I got a prescription for Ivermectin from my doctor. After waiting 20 minutes for it to be filled, the pharmacist informed me that they could not fill it.

That's messed up.
 

mundus

Duke status
Feb 26, 2018
37,469
16,465
113
During covid, I got a prescription for Ivermectin from my doctor. After waiting 20 minutes for it to be filled, the pharmacist informed me that they could not fill it.

That's messed up.
Why? Ivermectin has zero benefit for Covid no matter what Dr Rogan says.
 

mundus

Duke status
Feb 26, 2018
37,469
16,465
113
Who said it was for covid? That's between me and my doctor.

So, you are OK with that? Quite the useful idiot aren't you.
Posting accurate medical info makes one a useful idiot? Projection always projection with the stupid.
 

$kully

Duke status
Feb 27, 2009
60,346
17,172
113
IF the judge was wrong, then they should appeal. But they didn't. What is your legal opinion about that?

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

I know from several physicians who are friends that they were put under enormous pressure to push the vaccines, including on children, and refuse to recommend or prescribe other alternatives such as ivermectin. They were threatened with losing their jobs, licenses and admitting privileges at hospitals, among other things.

During covid the gubmint and its various agencies blatantly trampled on constitutional rights/physician/ patient relationships, and the hippocratic oath, etc., etc.

Given the tens of billions of dollars big pharma stood to make, only a fool would think that they didn't grease plenty of palms,, particularly know that we know how many lies we were told.
Do you realize that ivermectin doesn’t grow on trees?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Northern_Shores

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,640
14,478
113
Do you realize that ivermectin doesn’t grow on trees?
FDA and Big Pharma conspired on the vaccines to make big bucks but then this tiny pharmaceutical company called Merck, which is not big pharma at all, came in with horse paste (after they abandoned their own government bid for COVID vaccine which was not as effective as others).

FDA and Big Pharma then blocked poor little mom&pop pharmacy and horse paste.

Never forget loosers.

1712609525848.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: estreet and $kully