SPECIAL REPORT: Government argues falsely that ivermectin use was not actually blocked
SPECIAL REPORT: Government argues falsely that ivermectin use was not actually blocked
Because of a credible lawsuit, the federal government now is lying in a most amazing way
The Biden administration’s gaslighting machine is strongly in motion.
Federal lawyers recently argued in a Texas courtroom — and apparently with straight faces — that the government’s war on ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic was a figment of our collective imagination. What a load of BS. From the very beginning of the pandemic Fauci made sure to block wide use of IVM.
At issue is a lawsuit brought by three doctors against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The doctors maintain that the FDA wrongfully interfered with their ability to treat their patients with claims that IVM was useless to stop or cure COVID. And they were correct. Medical freedom was intentionally killed.
The FDA is being sued by Dr. Paul Marik of Virginia, Dr. Mary Bowden of Texas, and Dr. Robert Apter of Arizona. The three plaintiffs claim the FDA illegally prohibited them from prescribing the drug to their patients. This was true for both patients seen in doctors’ offices and in hospitals.
Yet during a hearing earlier this month, the Biden administration’s lawyers maintained the agency’s rejection of IVM was simply a “recommendation.” Probably a few hundred thousand Americans have died unnecessarily because of how the federal government actually blocked easy and early use of IVM by physicians.
“The cited statements were not directives. They were not mandatory. They were recommendations. They said what parties should do. They said, for example, why you should not take ivermectin to treat COVID-19,” Isaac Belfer, a lawyer defending FDA, told the court. “They did not say you may not do it, you must not do it. They did not say it’s prohibited or it’s unlawful. They also did not say that doctors may not prescribe Ivermectin.”
If Belfer’s assertion is true, it raises a very urgent question: On what legal grounds did hospitals all over the United States (where most COVID deaths have occurred) refuse to administer IVM to severely ill COVID-19 patients, even when patients and their family members begged for the drug to be administered? Many lawsuits were used by families to get deathbed patients access to IVM. But only a few succeeded, and in several cases patients walked out of the hospital in a few days. Hospitals used enormous resources to fight these cases.
If IVM was not prohibited by the FDA or any other U.S. medical authority for treating COVID-19, why did Dr. Paul Marik’s hospital prohibit him from administering the drug to his dying patients? Why was Dr. Mary Bowden reported to the Texas Medical Board for disciplinary action when she prescribed it? Why did many pharmacists fear losing their licenses if they filled IVM prescriptions for treating COVID-19?
Because the FDA did just that with the help of Fauci at NIH and the CDC.
Here are multiple examples of how IVM was blocked.
On the FDA’s official Twitter account, the agency wrote a post with the headline, “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.” An accompanying tweet stated, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
Another post, later on, added, “Hold your horses, y’all. Ivermectin may be trending, but it still isn’t authorized or approved to treat COVID-19.”
The FDA created an actual Q&A webpage devoted to IVM. The first question: “Q: Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? A: No.”
That answer also noted, “While there are approved uses for ivermectin in people and animals, it is not approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. You should not take any medicine to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless it has been prescribed to you by your health care provider and acquired from a legitimate source.”
The website also suggested ivermectin might be a “fraudulent” COVID treatment. Talk about intentional misinformation.
In response to the FDA’s argument, the p[laintiffs’ lawyer, Jared Kelson, replied that the FDA “clearly convey(ed) that this is not an acceptable way to treat these patients.”
IVM became a favorite and repeated target of criticism from leftists, especially after former President Donald Trump suggested it might work — as many, many studies and clinical experience in a number of countries, such as India. It must be administered early enough and at a high enough dose.
Liberals ridiculed Trump and other advocates of the drug for prescribing people a horse dewormer. People who suggested online that IVM could be used for COVID saw their accounts blocked or eradicated for spreading “misinformation.”
In August 2021, Dr. Anthony Fauci told CNN of IVM, “Don’t do it; there’s no evidence whatsoever that it works and it could potentially have toxicity… with people who have gone to poison control centers because they’ve taken the drug at a ridiculous dose and wind up getting sick,” he said. “There’s no clinical evidence that indicates that this works.” These were simply lies. Just another example that everything Fauci supported was WRONG.
Last year, Republican Sen. Rand Paul noted that “hatred for Trump” had “deranged these people so much that they’re unwilling to objectively study” IVM as a possible treatment.
Now, in a classic case of gaslighting, the government proclaims it never told anyone not to use the drug. Still more reason for the public NOT to trust the government.
As the FDA lawyer Belfer told U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, the statements on IVM “did not set agency policy,” and “simply provide(d) nonbinding recommendations to consumers.” Sure. What FDA actually did killed many Americans.
What many patients and their families asked for was to be allowed to try the drug (FDA-approved for River Blindness, Elephantiasis, and Scabies) for COVID. The patients and their kin gladly indemnified the hospitals and arranged to have their independent doctor deliver and administer the drug. Nevertheless, here are the ugly truths:
Hospital administrators absolutely refused to grant this wish. At best, they said they were following federal guidance against using IVM.
Hospital attorneys fought tooth and nail against using IVM to treat critically ill COVID patients, doing everything in their power to challenge patient lawsuits and appeal court orders to administer the drug. They disregarded many studies and reports showing that IVM worked.
Even when hospital doctors acknowledged that the patients were dying, they insisted it was better to let the disease take its natural course rather than allow patients to try ivermectin. Pure malpractice.
Even when patients’ families succeeded in getting a court orders to administer the drug, most hospitals still refused, even at the risk of being held in contempt of court. They were content with patients dying.
No matter what is now being said as some type of excuse for killing people, what should remain a priority is criminally prosecuting Fauci.
Here are some of my previous substack articles on IVM:
Hospitals, let's not forget the incentives to get patients to the death bed.
I don't think IVM has been approved to treat scabies - nor does it have to be. The entire narrative around FDA approval is just more gaslighting. Doctors are free to prescribe drugs for off-label treatment as long as they have obtained proper informed consent.