Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'FDA is not a Physician': Federal Appeals Court Sides with Doctors on Ivermectin
Emily Post News ^ | Sept 2 | Emily Post News

Posted on 09/02/2023 12:13:18 PM PDT by RandFan

A federal appeals court on Friday gave three doctors the green light to pursue their lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over using ivermectin off-label to treat COVID-19.

Just weeks after hearing the case, the 5th Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal on the grounds that the FDA has sovereign immunity. (The decision is at the bottom for paid subscribers to read.)

The ruling was written by U.S. Circuit Judge Don Willett, a Pres. Donald Trump appointee. He pointed to the FDA’s social media posts (below) about ivermectin that made it seem the medication was for farm animals.

(Excerpt) Read more at emilypostnews.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fda; ivermectin; lawsuit
FREEPERS in /conspiracy were right again! From the very start! Woo!
1 posted on 09/02/2023 12:13:18 PM PDT by RandFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RandFan

There was never any question about the FDA not being able to regulate the authority of anyone with prescriptive privileges to order ivermentin (Stromectrol) for any patient, for any reason.

This lawsuit does not void the State Medical Board problem. Those Boards DO have authority to do that (if I prescribed ivermectin for breast cancer and a patient relied on that to avoid effective treatments) I would lose my license, free speech be damned.

The data favoring ivermectin for COVID is not nearly as strong as many around here claim. It probably falls under the “open question” defense for prescriptive privilege, though.


2 posted on 09/02/2023 12:27:55 PM PDT by Jim Noble (They don't think you know but I know that you do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

Saw plenty of ‘THIS IS NOT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION’ signs on the Ivermectin at Tractor Supply. Oh, oh. They ain’t no doctor either.


3 posted on 09/02/2023 12:35:33 PM PDT by Libloather (Why do climate change hoax deniers live in mansions on the beach?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

‘FDA is not a physician’

Many of us screamed that for 2 years and were criticized, chastised, threatened, cajoled.

The question is: will ivermectin be made available for future COVID scares? [It doesn’t look like COVID, in one form or another, is going away.]

Ivermectic or Biden-forced jabs? Decisions, decisions.


4 posted on 09/02/2023 1:03:49 PM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Good response.

I am not crazy about vax, nor any of the cooked-up solutions to COVID.

Of course, I have a problem with the entire premise that COVID is a horrible dread disease and needs all this panic and hysteria. Yeah, that includes the people demanding Ivermectin and Hydrochloroquine.

I just don’t see the need for all this hooplah.


5 posted on 09/02/2023 1:19:38 PM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Federal-run medical care is as good as state-run DMVs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

True. FDA is not a physician.

FDA itself rightly states they do not and may not tell doctors how to practice medicine.

Covid was used for political gain and other things and norms and standards were violated.


6 posted on 09/02/2023 2:05:24 PM PDT by ifinnegan (Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Lol. Try again.


7 posted on 09/02/2023 2:30:33 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad ("the media are selling you a line of soap)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RandFan
...on the grounds that the FDA has sovereign immunity.

States have sovereign immunity under the 11th amendment. Where does the FDA, a federal agency, derive a sovereign immunity privilege? I would think the right to petition would prevent any sovereign immunity claim by a federal agency. The courts mostly use a narrow and strict definition of standing when they want to shield a federal agency.

8 posted on 09/02/2023 2:45:13 PM PDT by SeeSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

[It doesn’t look like COVID, in one form or another, is going away.]

Let’s start calling it SARS-CoV-2.6.35 to get the mutation we’re on approximately correct. Or is it 2.12. 23?

(You’re right, it ain’t going away, but it isn’t a huge threat either.)


9 posted on 09/02/2023 3:16:54 PM PDT by FamiliarFace (I got my own way of livin' But everything gets done With a southern accent Where I come from. TPetty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson