POLL: Should physicians be able to prescribe off-label medications such as ivermectin in the face of limited or no FDA-approved alternatives?

Should physicians be able to prescribe off-label medications such as ivermectin in the face of limited or no FDA-approved alternatives?

Should physicians be able to prescribe off-label medications such as ivermectin in the face of limited or no FDA-approved alternatives?
1397 votes
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Opinion does not equal news
Guest
Opinion does not equal news
20 days ago

Uhhh FDA approved alternative = vaccine

I’m all for talking to your doctor about alternatives, but let’s not forget that there is an effective treatment.

My body My choice
Guest
My body My choice
20 days ago

How is it effective if vaccinated individuals are still landing in the ER? If it was effective why is there a booster shot?

Kat
Guest
11 days ago

Visit the Mayo clinic site. That’s just one legitmate site. They state that most people in the hospital are unvaccinated. We are being lied to. Dems just want to control us.

caprice
Guest
caprice
20 days ago

What is the ultimate cost of that “effectiveness”?
No one knows, considering there is no longer a “control group” in the study.
God help us if over the next 3 years we find the cost was uncalculable.

Jim Durham
Guest
Jim Durham
11 days ago

Yeah right. I have a 40 year old daughter-in-law who was just forced to take the jab or lose her job and is now very sick and in the hospital after taking the second shot. Real effective.

Not a dumba$$
Guest
Not a dumba$$
20 days ago

Get vaccinated so we can get normal life and the economy/jobs back and maybe ramp up on some of these infrastructure projects! You are not a sheep, horse, or cow.

caprice
Guest
caprice
20 days ago
Reply to  Not a dumba$$

“In 2015, the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine, in its only award for treatments of infectious diseases since six decades prior, honored the discovery of ivermectin (IVM), a multifaceted drug deployed against some of the world’s most devastating tropical diseases.” – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34466270/

To suggest that Ivermectin is not a medicine for HUMANS is disingenuous.

Thomas Casey
Guest
Thomas Casey
18 days ago

If the government really wanted to stop covid, they would be advocating for other means, not only the vaccines. some can not take the vaccine, and some will refuse. Seems they just want to flex power and use this pandemic to keep emergency power.

pete
Guest
pete
17 days ago

The principle that physicians may prescribe any FDA “approved” medication for “off label” treatments is a long-standing prerogative. For some reason, with COVID-19, the government has decided to intervene in this long-standing procedure. Since it makes no reasonable sense for this sudden, new restriction, one can only presume that there are unfathomable political reasons for this change to long-standing policy.

The history of “off label” use of medications has resulted in discoveries that medications developed for one use are highly beneficial for another use. Often, these involve rare diseases that are not being studied by drug manufacturers (due to insufficient demand to repay the cost of FDA certification). Indeed, the FDA, in the past, has “allowed” such use without interference.

Generally experience with off-label use drugs is reported though medical journal articles and frequently is reported to the manufacturer of a particular drug. The FDA, generally, does not allow drug manufacturers to “recommend” off-label uses as part of their sales efforts — but the word tends to get around. (One could question this FDA rule as a First Amendment issue, but it has not been adjudicated directly.)

Certainly, with the arrival of the “novel corona virus,” some more adventurous doctors might like to try various medications that have the potential to counteract debilitating symptoms — and (especially at first) the lack of any known treatments for COVID-19 made this a worthwhile endeavor. (Obviously, doctor and patient (and/or patient’s family) should be fully informed of the off-label use.

I note that many medications, initially in development for one purpose were found to “work” for some other purpose, and the thrust of the research and ultimate FDA approval was made for the initially unintended purpose.

FWIW, as for COVID-19, if anyone asks my opinion, I suggest that it is generally reasonable to receive the vaccination (and any future boosters) as a precaution against the disease. Although, younger people who do not have co-morbidities, should consider the known risks and side-effects against their possibility of contracting COVID-19 and what either situation would mean for them.

Jim Durham
Guest
Jim Durham
11 days ago

The big lie is that the government cares about your health. They do not. Otherwise they would be vaccinating the tens of thousands of illegal immigrants that cross our boarders every day. There is NO mandate to vax the immigrants at the southern boarder or the tens thousands of Afghanis being flown in. In the mean time they are roaming around our country without even being tested. There is no mandate for Congress members or their staff. There is no mandate for USPS workers. There is no mandate for the NBA for crying out loud and they are just a few feet from the fans. Only a very disturbed person would rationalize or ignore the truth about who MUST take the vax or lose their jobs, homes and freedoms and who doesn’t have to take the vax.

10
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x