|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Apr 7, 2024 9:45:38 GMT 12
The FDA has had to completely retract it well publicised misleading advice about the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID patients brownstone.org/articles/ivermectins-victory-over-the-fda/Opens On March 21, a settlement was reached, leading to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agreeing to remove social media posts and webpages discouraging the use of ivermectin for treating Covid-19. This landmark case was initiated by plaintiffs Drs. Mary Talley Bowden, Robert I. Apter, and Paul E. Marik, who filed a lawsuit against the agency under the leadership of Commissioner Robert Califf, MD. The lawsuit was prompted by the FDA’s dissemination of misleading information about ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning anti-parasitic drug with a long history of use and inclusion in the World Health Organization’s essential list of medicines.An FDA spokesperson told the Epoch Times that the agency “has chosen to resolve this lawsuit rather than continuing to litigate over statements that are between two and nearly four years old.”Remember the key to Pfizer and other purveyors of MRNA gene therapy drugs obtaining emergency use approval was their "demonstrating" there was no other alternative treatment available. Must have been great to have the FDA and the Mainly Stupid Media on their side to discredit Ivermectin. Wonder how much money changed hands along the way?? |
|
|
|
Covid
Apr 7, 2024 20:16:25 GMT 12
Post by DuckMaster on Apr 7, 2024 20:16:25 GMT 12
The FDA has had to completely retract it well publicised misleading advice about the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID patients brownstone.org/articles/ivermectins-victory-over-the-fda/Opens On March 21, a settlement was reached, leading to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agreeing to remove social media posts and webpages discouraging the use of ivermectin for treating Covid-19. This landmark case was initiated by plaintiffs Drs. Mary Talley Bowden, Robert I. Apter, and Paul E. Marik, who filed a lawsuit against the agency under the leadership of Commissioner Robert Califf, MD. The lawsuit was prompted by the FDA’s dissemination of misleading information about ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning anti-parasitic drug with a long history of use and inclusion in the World Health Organization’s essential list of medicines.An FDA spokesperson told the Epoch Times that the agency “has chosen to resolve this lawsuit rather than continuing to litigate over statements that are between two and nearly four years old.”Remember the key to Pfizer and other purveyors of MRNA gene therapy drugs obtaining emergency use approval was their "demonstrating" there was no other alternative treatment available. Must have been great to have the FDA and the Mainly Stupid Media on their side to discredit Ivermectin. Wonder how much money changed hands along the way?? You've missed the boat by a mile. The FDA maintains that the drug is not suitable for treating or preventing Covid. That's there role, that's there job. They are very clear on this. The law suit doesn't change that and they have not changed there position on this. What's more there's plenty of treatment options available. There's heaps of antivirals. Remember when Trump got it he was loaded up with antivirals and blood transfusions. The availability of the treatment options has nothing to do with the emergency use approval. |
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Apr 10, 2024 9:04:48 GMT 12
The FDA has had to completely retract it well publicised misleading advice about the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID patients brownstone.org/articles/ivermectins-victory-over-the-fda/Opens On March 21, a settlement was reached, leading to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agreeing to remove social media posts and webpages discouraging the use of ivermectin for treating Covid-19. This landmark case was initiated by plaintiffs Drs. Mary Talley Bowden, Robert I. Apter, and Paul E. Marik, who filed a lawsuit against the agency under the leadership of Commissioner Robert Califf, MD. The lawsuit was prompted by the FDA’s dissemination of misleading information about ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning anti-parasitic drug with a long history of use and inclusion in the World Health Organization’s essential list of medicines.An FDA spokesperson told the Epoch Times that the agency “has chosen to resolve this lawsuit rather than continuing to litigate over statements that are between two and nearly four years old.”Remember the key to Pfizer and other purveyors of MRNA gene therapy drugs obtaining emergency use approval was their "demonstrating" there was no other alternative treatment available. Must have been great to have the FDA and the Mainly Stupid Media on their side to discredit Ivermectin. Wonder how much money changed hands along the way?? You've missed the boat by a mile. The FDA maintains that the drug is not suitable for treating or preventing Covid. That's there role, that's there job. They are very clear on this. The law suit doesn't change that and they have not changed there position on this. What's more there's plenty of treatment options available. There's heaps of antivirals. Remember when Trump got it he was loaded up with antivirals and blood transfusions. The availability of the treatment options has nothing to do with the emergency use approval. No you have missed the boat. The key issue at hand was the FDA attempting to block doctors from prescribing the "FDA approved for human use" drug Ivermectin by use of a deliberately misleading campaign and where they did not have authority. This discussion on the appeal to the fifth circuit high lights that. “The fundamental issue in this case is straightforward. After the FDA approves the human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no,” Jared Kelson, who is representing the doctors, told the appeals court, according to Courthouse News.
The doctors added that when the FDA told people to “stop it,” that amounted to a demand from a government health agency to stop prescribing, using, and selling ivermectin. And in many cases, that is exactly how doctors, hospitals and pharmacies took it — as a command to ban the drug issued by a government agency.
The agency also posted a long, involved warning to its website with an article entitled, “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.”
The FDA, though, claimed that with its offhanded tweet the agency was just trying to issue a “quippy tweet meant to share its informational article” and the “stop it” command was just a fun way to relay their concerns about the drug, the Epoch Times reported.
The tweet and its other statements “don’t prohibit doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID or for any other purpose,” FDA lawyer Honold told the court.
“FDA is clearly acknowledging that doctors have the authority to prescribe human ivermectin to treat COVID. So they are not interfering with the authority of doctors to prescribe drugs or to practice medicine,” Honold added.
The judges were not convinced that the FDA was merely trying to inform.
“What about when it said, ‘No, stop it’?” asked Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod. “Why isn’t that a command? If you were in English class, they would say that was a command.”
The plaintiffs added that the FDA has never been allowed to offer medical advice, and they said the FDA’s actions to undermine ivermectin is exactly that. The FDA, the lawyers said, didn’t just offer information, they actively offered advice to “stop” using the drug.
This was a point that most of the judges on the panel seemed inclined to agree with. Judge Edith Brown Clement, for instance, said, “You’re not authorized to give medical advice.”
So clearly it was the judges view that the FDA was acting outside of their authorised remit and FDA's subsequently settling this case was to say the least tacit acknowledgement. Strange, if they were so concerned about a drug being used for both human and veterinary applications in appropriate forms, where were the ads/tweets criticising the use of Penicillin and tetracycline, just to name 2 examples. The FDA appears far too close to the pharmaceutical companies compromising its role as the regulator in USA. |
|
|
|
Covid
Apr 10, 2024 19:24:36 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by sabre on Apr 10, 2024 19:24:36 GMT 12
The Australian Journal of General Practice is published by the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners... "Multiple studies have shown an increased risk of myocarditis after vaccination with mRNA encoding SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.25–27 mRNA vaccines can result in spike protein expression in muscle tissue, the lymphatic system, cardiomyocytes and other cells after entry into the circulation.28 Recipients of two or more injections of the mRNA vaccines display a class switch to IgG4 antibodies. Abnormally high levels of IgG4 might cause autoimmune diseases, promote cancer growth, autoimmune myocarditis and other IgG 4-related diseases (IgG4-RD) in susceptible individuals.29" "There is concern that COVID-19 vaccination per se might contribute to long COVID, giving rise to the colloquial term ‘Long Vax(x)’.22 The spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 exhibits pathogenic characteristics and is a possible cause of post-acute sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 vaccines utilise a modified, stabilised prefusion spike protein that might share similar toxic effects with its viral counterpart.22,23 A possible association between COVID-19 vaccination and the incidence of POTS has been demonstrated in a cohort of 284,592 COVID-19-vaccinated individuals, though at a rate that was one-fifth of the incidence of POTS after SARS-CoV-2 infection.24" "One in five of those experiencing long COVID in the UK stopped working and was not back to work six months after disease onset.18 In Australia, an estimated 240,000 of those with long COVID no longer work full time.4 Work absenteeism might significantly impact the nation’s economy, as in the UK.19 In the US, long COVID has been declared a national emergency.20" www1.racgp.org.au/ajgp/2024/april/long-covid-sufferers-can-take-heart?fbclid=IwAR3xylZ4Qo_2IERBm1UPA6HjMADlh5QRNMnEwxWk6JbNf_v6x4DwYlDBpX0 |
|
|
|
Covid
Apr 11, 2024 9:06:08 GMT 12
Post by Cantab on Apr 11, 2024 9:06:08 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Covid
Apr 11, 2024 9:48:32 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by sabre on Apr 11, 2024 9:48:32 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Covid
Apr 18, 2024 18:51:40 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by sabre on Apr 18, 2024 18:51:40 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Covid
Apr 26, 2024 9:38:29 GMT 12
Post by fish on Apr 26, 2024 9:38:29 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Covid
Apr 26, 2024 14:35:36 GMT 12
Post by ComfortZone on Apr 26, 2024 14:35:36 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Covid
May 6, 2024 8:50:25 GMT 12
Post by muzled on May 6, 2024 8:50:25 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Covid
May 6, 2024 16:34:14 GMT 12
Post by fish on May 6, 2024 16:34:14 GMT 12
Department of Prime Mincer & Cabinet is exempt from OIA's?!?! I didn't realise they weren't funded by us the tax payer... Oh, wait... |
|
|
|
Covid
May 7, 2024 7:51:51 GMT 12
via mobile
muzled likes this
Post by dutyfree on May 7, 2024 7:51:51 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Covid
May 7, 2024 9:30:06 GMT 12
Post by ComfortZone on May 7, 2024 9:30:06 GMT 12
seems the government knew a whole lot more about the origins of the WuFlu than they let on hatchardreport.com/labour-government-deliberately-gaslit-nz-public/opens www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/04/us-shared-gobsmacking-lab-leak-evidence-with-uk-pandemic/ reveals that in January 2021, the United States government shared “gobsmacking” intelligence information with its Five Eyes partners (UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand), which suggested a very “high likelihood” that the Covid virus leaked from a Chinese lab. The Five Eyes intelligence-sharing nations were convened to discuss the probability of a lab leak as the US warned that China had covered up research on coronaviruses and military activity at a laboratory in Wuhan.
At the meeting, Mike Pompeo, then US Secretary of State, presented a summary of classified American intelligence reports collected in the early days of the pandemic and compiled by the State Department. The intelligence reports themselves are understood to have been shared separately via the Five Eyes network between October and December 2020.
The research revealed for the first time that Chinese military officials had worked with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in the years leading up to the pandemic, and that some researchers at the lab had become ill shortly before the virus was first recorded nearby. It also showed that Chinese scientists had carried out coronavirus “gain of function” research at the institute, which has since become a key piece of evidence for the lab leak theory.
The implication is obvious, the US suspected with good reason that the coronavirus was developed as part of a Chinese bioweapon project |
|
|
|
Covid
May 8, 2024 14:52:44 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by Fogg on May 8, 2024 14:52:44 GMT 12
AZ jab banned in EU and withdrawn worldwide.
|
|
|
|
Covid
May 9, 2024 15:20:09 GMT 12
Post by muzled on May 9, 2024 15:20:09 GMT 12
|
|
