“What happened to the Right To Try law?”
I’ve asked that many times and have never gotten an answer.
L
You have received the answer in right try several times. Right to try does not equate to right to demand or receive.
If you took the time to read the entire transcript but both the federal and state right to try laws were argued and the ruling was substantially the patient cannot demand a treatment his physicians do not support in their medical judgment.
As the ruling reads the patient and family knew that Mayo was a closed staff and chose to go to Mayo. Mayo has made it clear that ivermectin is not a viable therapeutic in their judgment.
The trial judge stated it would irrevocably harm the practice of medicine by forcing unqualified physicians (in this case the petitioners expert is neither board certified nor an intensivist) on staff and granting them privileges they do not possess the requisite background for.
The record of hearing clearly demonstrates the literature is equivocal when it comes to ivermectin. As the judge ruled it is not up to him to hang up his black robe and put on a white coat.
Having read the entire transcript the petitioners physician did petitioner no favors. He came across as a underqualified hack. He had to admit he is not boars certified and that part of the transcript was ugly.
The judges ruling is largely very conservative and well reasoned.