Ivermectin Legislation
This article was written in March, 2022, a year and a half ago:
USA Today reports that at least 26 states have proposed or passed legislation that would increase patient access to the invermectin, a drug some individuals have asked to be used to treat COVID-19, though its effectiveness remains under debate.
Many of the legislative bills who protect physicians who prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19 against disciplinary action from state medical boards and hospitals.
According to the U.S. Food Drug and Administration website, the agency FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans or animals. Ivermectin is approved for human use to treat infections caused by some parasitic worms and head lice and skin conditions like rosacea, according to the FDA..
The Federation of State Medical Boards has opposed any legislation intended to limit a state board’s ability to protect patients, but legal experts says states do have the final authority on who can practice medicine and how. Jennifer Bard, PhD, professor in UC’s Colleges of Law and Medicine, shared her thoughts.
“Health and safety is within the states’ power unless the federal government uses authority … to step in,” said Bard, who was quoted by USA Today. “States are doing what they can do within their authority to remove whatever concerns physicians might have prescribing these drugs.”
Making invermectin available over-the-counter may, however be a step too far for the authority of legislators. “There’s an internal process for the FDA to change the label,” Bard told USA Today. “The FDA could make something over-the-counter, but only they can do that.”
In the following:
IV: Ivermectin
HCQ: Hydroxychloroquine
Researching the legislation, there are several objectives:
1. Over the counter purchase of IV or HCQ or
2. Permit off label RX of IV or HCQ by healthcare personnel who can write Rx. Can be for either prophylaxis or for treatment; isn’t specific to Covid-19
3. Prevent medical boards or healthcare facilities from punishing physicians for prescribing for Covid-19. Retroactive. If punished or counts against performance, reevaluation of performance and expunge from record; payment for any lost wages and reinstatement; legal costs paid by healthcare facility.
Here is an FYI attachment regarding off label use, which should be a guide in structuring a bill.
https://jaapl.org/content/early/2020/11/24/JAAPL.200049-20
Note that it deals with IVM and HCQ: it is negative about them. But it ignores the science that has developed, along with the wide-spread use and established protocols for use, both as a prophylaxis and as a treatment for many viral diseases.
The arguments listed in this article are the same as those argued by a local hospital for why it did not use IVM. I believe it first argued that it could not be used at all due to scientific evidence (not effective) and because there was no accepted treatment protocol. Now I believe it allows Rx for treatment, but not for prophylaxis. But I can't get anything out of them.
As I continue to reiterate, because I am convinced it is true: the healthcare systems at all levels, from DHEC to the physician, is controlled by extralegal (non-legislative) conditions placed on funding by the deep state. The healthcare systems implement them in order, they think, to receive the federal funds attached to the conditions.
IMHO, and I think this is the honest scientific consensus, the deep state, funded and incestuous with pharma, does not like IVM because it invalidates EUA- it is a treatment for Covid-19. If healthcare is to regain integrity, the legislature must expose this, legislate to stop it, and create and enforce punishment on those in the state that facilitated the damage caused by Covid-19 policy.
To solve the information problem on what is driving the healthcare systems re mandates and use of IVM, we have to demonstrate some state equity in each healthcare system. Then our legislators can get the equivalent of a FOIA to open their books and decision processes. To solve the prophylaxis and treatment protocol problem in general for off-label use, my reading of the law suggests that it will be necessary to set up an state organization that has FDA-like function. The federal FDA can limit interstate commerce, but not instate, so this is what should happen.
BUT, in order to do that plus everything else, including prohibiting mandates in a healthcare responsible way, a way that re-establishes integrity, the state will need to implement the Resolution to set up the four stage quality and monitoring process:
(1) Testing pharmas for quality coming into state; (ala the recent discovery of DNA contamination in psi-mRNA pharma)
(2) Evaluating the good manufacturing process of companies that produce pharmas that are distributed in the state; (no doubt poor quality management the cause of the DNA contamination + Indian + Chinese cost cutting quality manufacturing methods)
(3) establish a RHIO regulatory commission and a real time healthcare data monitoring process;
(4) An autopsy process for unusual deaths, starting with deaths suspected to have been caused by AEs due to psi-mRNA pharmas and related pharmas.
These four processes will be the subject of 4 bills to be submitted in the coming session. I’ll review each.
Only with this basis will we be able to provide realistic, healthcare policy independent of the feds corrupt healthcare management three letter agencies.
Associated with the Ivermectin issue is the issue of healthcare professionals freedom to (1) discuss alternative treatments, even if they are not in favor with the administration (either because of conditional federal or state funding or because of personal bias of the administrators) (2) not suffer discrimnation based on their opinions (3) within the off-label ethical and scientific guidelines, to be able to presecribe off-label uses of products regardless of any level of adminstration, to the President of the USA. That is its own bill.
Please provide any state legislation examples and any comments in the comment section.
Supporting publications:
Bioethics and Covid-19: the Tension of Quarantine and Civil Liberties (2020) by Jeffrey Hall Dobken.
In TN we can get Ivermectin without a prescription. That law was passed last year. Its effectiveness is not under debate. It has worked for a heck of a lot more people than we know and including members of Congress. I too used it along with HCQ when I was deathly ill and I am still here. If I would have went to the hospital (which I was not about to do) I would have surely not come home except in a wooden box.