Posted on 05/19/2020 5:37:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
In the May 14 edition of her Fox News show, Laura Ingraham interviewed Dr. Ivette Lozano, a Texas physician, who was having trouble with a pharmacy that had refused to fill her off-label prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) without submitting to new red tape. It seems the Texas pharmacy board is requiring physicians to reveal patients’ medical diagnoses before allowing pharmacies to dispense HCQ prescriptions.
Dr. Lozano’s pharmacy must have been citing Title 22, Part 15, Chapter 291, Subchapter A, §291.30. However, if one goes to Texas Pharmacy Rules at the Texas State Board of Pharmacy, and clicks on the link for Subchapter A just under Chapter 291, the webpage one is taken to does not list §291.30.
A little more digging gave me Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Response at the Texas Medical Board, which, under “COVID-19 Emergency Rules,” has this link: Texas State Board of Pharmacy -- §291.30. Medication Limitations. That link is for a webpage showing that §291.30 was an emergency action, and it makes this requirement of Texas physicians like Dr. Lozano who prescribe HCQ,: “(1)the prescription or medication order bears a written diagnosis from the prescriber consistent with the evidence for its use.”
On May 15, the day after Laura Ingraham’s interview of Dr. Lozano, The Texan ran “Pharmacy Board Loosens Restrictions on Hydroxychloroquine Prescriptions, Reversing Course” by Kim Roberts:
Because of her concern for patient privacy that seemed incompatible with the unprecedented rule, Lozano contacted State Senator Bob Hall to ask for help reaching the Texas State Board of Pharmacy. Hall was concerned about the rule that seemed to be inhibiting the dispensing of these potentially life-saving prescriptions…
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The intended use for the drug is not required if the practitioner determines the furnishing of this information is not in the best interest of the patient in accordance with Board rule 291.34 (b)(7). [See (7)(A)(vii), it’s on the second page of the rule.]
An interesting interview:
The MSM / DNC are willing to kill you in the hope of destroying the economy and OragemanBad. That, and the MSM is beholden to Big Pharma for ad dollars.
Answer: WITHOUT A DOUBT!!
Yes
Hydroxychloroquine
BY FULL MEASURE STAFF SUNDAY, MAY 17TH 2020
http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/hydroxychloroquine
This is Sharyl Attkisson and her people. Worthwhile.
short answer is YES.
Dr. Lozano was on with Laura Ingraham again last night, saying she was, once again, having difficulties acquiring hydroxy. Dr. Knut Wittkowski was also on re big pharma/NIH. the whole show is worth watching:
18 May: Ingraham Angle, Fox News
7m in, Dr. Knut Wittkowski
19m45s Dr. Ivette Lozano etc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frf4mebaaxg
meant to add BigFakeNewsMSM is doing the suppressing too.
I’ve been an avid follower of Medcram from the beginning and 2 days ago YouTube took down the most recent lecture referring to the effacacy of HCQ. I had to go to the website to see the video....
What percentage of TV ads are from Pharma? There is no money in HCQ. Though the left did try to say there was, that Trump was promoting it for profit, which is patently absurd.
The problem is entirely fear of AMBULANCE CHASING LAWYERS.
Every lawyer bringing a COVID 19 related suit should be shot dead on the court house steps. Such trash does not deserve to be living in America.
Of course big pharma is against hydroxy. No big bucks to be made.
Doublethink leads to doublespeak. Orwell predicted today's Democrats/socialists/liberals/progressives/communists (but, I repeat myself) in their holding two opposing beliefs simultaneously. There's no money to be made by big pharma on HCQ, but President Trump will reap a fortune promoting it.
Dr. Marc Seagal on Fox crediting this medicine with saving his fathers life.
The Donald is once again setting the agenda when he sees “ the cabal” doing an end run on something that , with a doctors review/prescreption can help with this issue and at a much lower cost....
The MSM doesn’t realize we watch all the ads and see all the disclaimers put around those , so we are supposed to just take their word of “ Don’t use this”
Every lawyer bringing a COVID 19 related suit should be shot dead on the court house steps.
Except in limited circumstances (like a nursing home) where the victim could not have been exposed any other way, it is impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (or even by a preponderance of the evidence) where a virus infected him.
But the nursing home victims' survivors should be suing Cuomo into poverty for his orders that sent them back to probable death. Let the blood-sucking lawyers win that one!
Link?
Life has risks.
If you fear exposure, don’t go to a Nursing Home. Total prevention to a lawyerly determination is never possible. Being in a nursing home during the pandemic is negligence on the part of the patient.
Overt collusion would be hard to prove; but pharma is incentivised to oppose the drug, and the industry is no doubt riddled with Trump haters.
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.