×

Loading...
Ad by
Ad by

FDA律师宣布伊维菌素可以用于新冠肺炎,兽药长兽药短的疫苗粉们等将来中招后医生开给你伊维菌素千万不要吃哦

During a court hearing, representatives for the FDA said that doctors can prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, contradicting pandemic-era statements.
Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下家园 / 医药保健 / FDA律师宣布伊维菌素可以用于新冠肺炎,兽药长兽药短的疫苗粉们等将来中招后医生开给你伊维菌素千万不要吃哦 +10
    During a court hearing, representatives for the FDA said that doctors can prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, contradicting pandemic-era statements.
    • 智忧们认为,科学发展了,两月前兽药不能吃,现在可以吃了,哈哈哈。 +15
      • 哈哈,笑死我了 +9
    • Very recently I had a chat with a nurse of a big hospital. She said ivermectin is horse paste. I told her it's a safe medicine but she didn't seem to believe. Seems the quality of our medical care professionals is very questionable. +3
      • 加拿大的doctor Moore昨天新闻发布会上说,"现在"他们意识到,18岁以下的孩子,感染covid基本没有去重症的机会, 但是打了疫苗有1/5000的机会得心肌炎。"现在"? Really??? +9

        而且肯定不是1/5000,他们故意把这个数字往小里面说,多伦多某医院的医务人员说, 现在多伦多癌症和心脏病人数,爆发性的增加。如果只是1/5000,不可能她用"爆发"二字。政治指导医学,你们都懂。

        现在我去网站上再看这段新闻发布会的内容, 已经被主流媒体删掉了。但我聪明啊, 昨天把新闻发布会screen recording都录下来了😂

      • 你有所不知,我读过一些医生的讨论,传统医学是医生通过资格考就可以自作主张根据自己判断开药,所以他们有独立思考能力,如今是当了医生还要服从上级指示,这就导致医学人士在心态和技术上的双重退化,以后AI都可以做医生了 +5
    • 加拿大这帮孙子还是不能开伊维菌素,药店还是不给发, +10
      • 最权威的加拿大卫生罐和我一样,也不信FDA了,自创科学喽 +2
        • 等到民众觉醒的那天明明有现成的安全的便宜的药物可治疗新冠却被强迫打入没有长期安全数据的能引起严重副作用甚至死亡的不防感染的实验疫苗会发生什么?那些卫生罐都要进行大审判! +4
          • 为了避免大审判当然只能死不认错了,不然要追究责任他们赔不起啊 +4
            • 所以就算是trump上台也不能让自家阵营的肯尼迪有机会;就算是引起核大战也不能让trump上台。。。
              世界前景堪忧,只因高科技疫苗。
          • 冤有头,债有主。土豆订了11针,无论谁做卫生官都得力推,否则得下台。 +2
        • 这有点过份, 两个科学教教主说法不一致了。让我们科学教教众信哪个好啊? 🤣。这世上最可怕的不是流氓有文化, 是医生变商人,变政府发言人。每次看见人家说, "政府为了人民", +5
          真觉得他们是一个合格的共产主义国家的先锋队员, 可爱得很😂
          • 还有一点挺有趣的,有些挺中的和有些黑中的在这一事件上都信任政府的操守,呵呵。 +2
      • 气功中功法轮功都治病,鸡血红茶菌素海藻素也有效。你为什么不信?
        • 唉,结果疫苗连大神都不如。。。问问,打几针了? +5
          • 我是说过去有人宣称那些东西都治好了他们的病,你相信那些东西能治吗?
            • 伊维菌素治新冠有专门研究的,还很多。那个英国前疫苗推手Dr. Campbell 做过一期Review这个文章的视频,不知道还在不在。他现在到是180%转弯了,还算有良知。 +4
              • 我没有说依为菌素不能治新冠,我也没有说莲花清瘟不能治新冠。他们能不能我们现在都不知道。IVM 最起码从正规的渠道来说是不知道。莲花清瘟有官方背书,你敢相信吗?
                • 我相信一线医生,不相信政府霉体和“疫苗科学家”,那些所谓“正规”渠道不过是忽悠。凡不允许挑战的“科学”都是洗脑。 +1
                  • 问题是你相信哪个或哪些一线医生,如果在医生里进行一个调查,我觉得相信伊维菌素不能或不确定治新冠的医生要占多数,你相信谁?
                    • 你错了。凡使用伊维菌素的医生害怕主管吊销执照最不济的会选择闭嘴,勇敢点的会站出来质疑,凡大声反对的都是没用过的,而且以不看病的公共卫生官最突出。 +3
      • 让痛觉飞一会儿:D
    • 怎么不是FDA会计出来宣布的? +5
      • Yeah, why?
      • 没让你吃兽药,请继续打下去不要停 +8
    • “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it,” read a 2021 tweet still posted on the FDA’s social media page.
      • 法官:Stop it是命令,FDA律师:不是命令 ,只是个俏皮话,说着玩的。(律师知道FDA无权指导公众用药,那是犯法的,所以要拼命抵赖) +4
        • 哈哈,脸皮厚+双标是现在左派的标志,达不到这两条就还是右派 +7
          • 脸皮厚加双标是右派的典型 看看性侵犯川普就知道了
            • 你比川普强多了 +1
              • 论坛上的有一个算一个,谁不比性侵犯川普强啊
        • 对啊,FDA 从未改口:兽药别吃。就这么简单
      • 很明显这是针对公众的campaign,而不是针对医生的命令.
    • 链接打不开。 +1
      • Thus far in the hearing,
        judges have indicated they agree that the FDA is not able to give medical advice to the public. However, the FDA argues that it did no such thing, claiming Congressional authority to “communicate information to the public about safe uses of drugs.”

        “The FDA is politically accountable, just like all other executive agencies,” Honold said.

        The hearing concluded on Tuesday afternoon. Judges on the panel did not immediately announce when they will rule on the appeal.
      • The text +1

        FDA Lawyer Announces Ivermectin Can be Prescribed for COVID-19

        2 days ago

        Add comment

        Connor Walcott 

        3 min read

        ADD COMMENT

        In a major narrative reversal, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said that doctors are free to prescribe Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. This admission, made by an FDA attorney appearing before the United States 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, is in direct contrast with the organization’s messaging during the pandemic when Ivermectin was labeled a “controversial horse dewormer.”

        During a court hearing, representatives for the FDA said that doctors can prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, contradicting pandemic-era statements. | (AP Photo/Mike Stewart)
        (AP Photo/Mike Stewart)

        “FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” said attorney Ashley Cheung Honold during oral arguments before the court on Tuesday. The 5th Circuit is in the process of hearing a case brought by three doctors who alleged that the FDA overstepped its boundaries with its public information campaign against human consumption of Ivermectin. Doctors Paul Marik, Mary Bowden, and Robert Apter all allege that they were professionally harmed by their efforts to prescribe the drug to patients. A federal judge threw out the case in 2022, prompting the hearing in the appeals court.

        Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA and other government bodies strongly cautioned against taking Ivermectin, a powerful anti-parasitic drug that won its creators the 2015 Nobel Prize in Medicine, as a treatment for the virus. Citing examples of people hospitalized after consuming the non-prescription version of the drug meant for animals, the government took steps to throttle Ivermectin prescriptions.

        Subscribe to PBD’s YouTube channel today for every episode LIVE or On Demand!

        “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it,” read a 2021 tweet still posted on the FDA’s social media page.



        During the pandemic, public figures like podcaster Joe Rogan spoke openly about taking Ivermectin once they tested positive for COVID-19, but various levels of online censorship prevented them from talking about any potential benefits.

        However, during the court appearance, the FDA maintains that the public information campaign was never an order, but rather a suggestion.

        “What about when it said, ‘No, stop it’?” Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, a panel judge for the hearing, asked. “Why isn’t that a command? If you were in English class, they would say that was a command.”

        Honold responded that “in some contexts, those words could be construed as a command. But in this context, where FDA was simply using these words in the context of a quippy tweet meant to share its informational article, those statements do not rise to the level of a command.”

        Thus far in the hearing, judges have indicated they agree that the FDA is not able to give medical advice to the public. However, the FDA argues that it did no such thing, claiming Congressional authority to “communicate information to the public about safe uses of drugs.”

        “The FDA is politically accountable, just like all other executive agencies,” Honold said.

        The hearing concluded on Tuesday afternoon. Judges on the panel did not immediately announce when they will rule on the appeal.

        • 写得好像头头是道,
          其实好多地方不清楚,甚至错误,比如这个 Ivermectin, a powerful anti-parasitic drug that won its creators the 2015 Nobel Prize in Medicine, as a treatment for the virus. 2015年前有COVID -19吗?医生应该知道FDA无权要求他们开不开什么药,而且他们是开了,所以才有起诉。我认为FDA在用伊维菌素治疗新冠病毒上的态度是正确的。
          • 原文说2015年获诺贝尔奖并没有说2015年能治疗新冠
            • 2015年获诺贝尔奖和治疗新冠屁关系都没有。文章在拉大旗作虎皮,糊弄人呢
              • 获奖是事实,哪里糊弄人了 +3
                • 2015年获诺贝尔奖和治疗新冠屁关系都没有。莫言还获诺贝尔奖呢,丰乳肥臀和檀香刑拿来治新冠行吗?如果有人读了这两本书后,新冠病好了,你能说是他治病吗?
          • 原来医生一直用IVM治疗新冠,FDA宣传不能治疗新冠以后,医院禁止医生用IVM治疗新冠,所以医生告FDA干扰行医。 +6
            • IVM 没有经过临床试验,FDA 宣传正常,这就像我们不相信莲花清瘟一样。至于莲花清瘟能不能治疗新冠,要看临床试验结果。 +1
              • 问题是WHO/CDC/FDA这帮家伙根本不让临床试验啊 +4
                • 有人申请了吗?
                  这种无力可图的事,没有哪一个“傻瓜”会去申请
              • 只要是FDA批准上市的药,医生就可以用来治疗另一种病,那是医生的权利,不需要临床试验,从来都是这么做的,FDA从来没宣传不行。为何FDA对IVM就另眼相待? +6
                • 在这种情况下,
                  医生有责任对患者说明这种药物不是用来治愈他的这个病的,医生用它只是实验性质。如果病人接受,那么可以进行治疗试验。而FDA作为医药的主管部门,是不能在没有根据的情况下做这种宣传的。医院作为具体的责任单位,也会禁止医生这样做的。如果医生用FDA批准的药治疗另一种病,那么相应的法律后果是要医生自己承担的。
                  • 看来你不知道美国加拿大医生开出的处方有1/3是off lable的,在用IVM治新冠之前,FDA从来没说这种做法不行,没有任何医院禁止这种做法。 +4
                    • 你把我说的再看一遍。 +1
                      我前边已经说了医生是可以这样做的,FDA向人们宣传不要用ivm治新冠也是没错的,医院禁止大夫用也是没错的。如果一个医生独立行医,那么,就不存在这些情况,他想怎么给病人开药就可以开,只要他给患者说明了,而且患者也接受风险。如果医生是某个医院的,,那么对不起,你的接受医院的管理。就像我们有很多人不愿打疫苗,但又不得不打。
                      • FDA从来没有向人们宣传不要用off lable的药,医院也从来没有禁止医生开off lable的药,为啥IVM就特别对待? +4
                        • 我的理解力只能到他们应该或者说有权利这样做,至于为什么特别对待,那是超出了我的理解力了。
                          • 他们不应该这样做,也没有权利这样做,所以医院和FDA都被告了。 +4
                            • 这是行政机构的常规做法,做超出权限的事情,如果没人反抗,就等于默认他们有权,反抗的话,个体就要付出极大代价,毕竟个体跟system作战谈何容易,一则未必赢,二则还有无知者看笑话 +4
                            • 绕了一圈儿又回来了。FDA的那句话我认为是真对老百姓的,是campaign slogan,应该做。而医院有权要求医生做什么不做什么。
    • FDA 网站上仍然是 "Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19" 正在处于自扇嘴巴子的阶段,正在等痛感通过漫长的神经线路传到FDA的大脑... +1