Posted on 06/10/2022 4:32:53 PM PDT by blam
A Washington law firm has filed a federal lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for interfering with the use of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.
The Food and Drug Administration is facing legal action over statements made about ivermectin and its use against COVID-19. (Sonis Photography/Shutterstock)
The lawsuit was filed by Boyden Gray & Associates on behalf of three doctors who were disciplined for prescribing human-grade ivermectin to patients.
The firm’s founder, attorney Boyden Gray, is a former legal adviser to the Reagan and Bush administrations.
Gray told The Epoch Times that the FDA had violated well-established law that allows doctors to prescribe an FDA-approved drug as an off-label treatment.
Ivermectin was no different, he said. It was approved by the FDA in 1966.
“Congress recognized the importance of letting doctors be doctors and expressly prohibited the FDA from interfering with the practice of medicine,” Gray said.
“That is exactly what the FDA has done time and time again throughout this pandemic, assuming authority it doesn’t have and trying to insert itself in the medical decisions of Americans everywhere.”
The three plaintiffs in the case are Dr. Paul Marik of Virginia, Dr. Mary Bowden of Texas, and Dr. Robert Apter of Arizona.
Marik is a founder of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care 21 Alliance (FLCCC), a national nonprofit that promotes alternative COVID-19 treatments to the government-touted vaccine.
“The FDA has made public statements on ivermectin that have been misleading and have raised unwarranted concern over a critical drug in preventing and treating COVID-19,” Marik told The Epoch Times. “To do this is to ignore both statutory limits on the FDA’s authority and the significant body of scientific evidence from peer-reviewed research.”
According to Marik, more than 80 medical trials conducted since the outbreak of COVID-19 show that ivermectin is a safe and effective treatment for the virus.
Gray said the FDA has engaged in unlawful interference with the use of ivermectin and should be held accountable for that.
The lawsuit included several statements made by the FDA that Gray said show that the administration interfered with the use of ivermectin.
They include an Aug. 21, 2021, Twitter post by the agency: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
The post, with an image of a horse and a doctor, has a headline that reads, “Why you should not use ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19.”
Marik, Bowden, and Apter are among a number of U.S. doctors across the United States who have been disciplined for prescribing ivermectin.
Marik, a critical care specialist, was suspended by Sentara Norfolk General Hospital for prescribing ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment. Bowden, an ear, nose, and throat specialist, was suspended from the Houston Medical Hospital. Apter was under investigation by both the Washington Medical Commission and Arizona Medical Board for prescribing ivermectin.
Marik was recently informed that he was under investigation by the medical licensing board in Virginia.
Gray filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Texas.
The doctors are seeking a permanent injunction that would prohibit the FDA from interfering with the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.
Good, I hope they win and those hospitals that punished these doctors are forced to pay millions in damages.
My understanding is that ivermectin doesn’t always work but when it does work—it works just fine toward getting rid of the symptoms of covid.
Bump
Excellent!
I’d take it on the chance that it would work for me.
If it didn’t, I’d be no worse off than without it.
It needs to be taken in conjunction with zinc and as early as possible for best results
If you use it early enough, and don’t have catastrophic co-morbidities, it works nearly 99.999999% of the time.
The alphabet agencies have blackballed Ivermectin because it works better than big oharma’s clot-shot “vaccines.”
The incestuous relationship between the feds and pharma are nearing dissolution.
"10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
"Many are the exercises of power reserved to the States wherein a uniformity of proceeding would be advantageous to all. Such are quarantines, health laws [emphasis added], regulations of the press, banking institutions, training militia, etc., etc." —Thomas Jefferson to James Sullivan, 1807.
"They form a portion of that immense mass of legislation, which embrace every thing in the territory of a state not surrendered to the general government. Inspection laws, quarantine laws, and health laws [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state, and others, which respect roads, fences, &c. are component parts of state legislation, resulting from the residuary powers of state sovereignty. No direct power over these is given to congress, and consequently they remain subject to state legislation, though they may be controlled by congress, when they interfere with their acknowledged powers." —Justice Joseph Story, Article I, Section 10, Clause 2, 1833.
“Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” —Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Corrections, insights welcome.
Also, Trump's red tsunami of patriot supporters are reminded that they must vote twice this election year. Your first vote is to primary career RINO incumbents. Your second vote is to replace outgoing Democrats and RINOs with Trump-endorsed patriot candidates.
Again, insights welcome.
It’s too bad they can’t drag the criminal fraudster CDC into the suit because of their non-scientific recommended/mandated Fauci/Wuhan virus protocols ... maybe they can get them separately.
Millions would have been saved, and more millions would have been rapidly cured, had Ivermectin been the “ vaccine “.
It’s an international crime that will never be revealed.
The article fails to point out WHY the FDA is anti-Ivermectin. It’s all about MONEY. The vaccine” mantra is all about conditioning the sheeeple for control, and MONEY.
Do some research on the FLCCC.
Sure hope they win. Regardless of how effective Ivermectin is. There are studies that show it worked...however somewhat flawed. These studies are better than the studies the CDC uses to claim that masks work. Either way, hope they are vindicated.
My 75 year old sister got COVID and went to her private doctor ( he does not take medicare patients) and he gave her Ivermectin. She went back to work three days later...yes, she still works, claims to love it.
...and no worms!
Yeah. 2 years too late.
Not that it matters. The Rats will judge shop and a favorable ruling banning Ivermectin is pre-ordained. The Rats always fix it to get the answer they want. Kudos to the tardy Docs, but this lawsuit isn’t going anywhere.
Justice delayed is justice denied anyway.
Where covid is concerned public health agencies have forfeited all credibility and become little more than lobbyists for big pharma. FLCCC has more credibility than the NIH and FDA at this point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.