They should be held accountable for being inaccurate or negligent, but nothing about the information you reference here says Ivermectin is effective in the treatment of Covid.  You act like the "science" changed and now Ivermectin is effective - nobody is saying that in your reference.  

 Nothing about the science of Ivermectin has changed in your reference.

 This is about how the FDA presented information on social media.  The FDA never said doctors can't prescribe it, but the employers of these doctors used the FDA media as an excuse for sure.

 Except there is no substantial clinical evidence.  

 Your evidence is the India studies where the hospital didn't even have the equipment to run the tests and the patient birthdates changed multiple times.  Then they admitted it was altered and faked.  Also you used a Facebook post as evidence.  

 That's not science, you were lied to.  Your reference LIED to you.  But if you Observe that, you can't keep saying Ivermectin was proven to be effective.

 For someone that gripes about people who believe anything they are told you sure hang onto information that literally says they aren't telling you the truth.

Because it was not allowed !

 The FDA can not stop all worldwide clinical outcomes from being looked at.  There is not enough clinical evidence to support Ivermectin as a cure for Covid, globally.



Which, 'substantial clinical evidence', showed it did not.
 (as well as other drugs)

 All clinical evidence.  All evidence will show something is not something until there is evidence that shows it IS something.  What we need is more objectively verifiable proof at Ivermectin is effective against Covid.  More trials would definitely help, but real ones, not the LIES referenced on this forum that literally say they aren't true.


Yep, and it was very clear,
the goal was to tell doctors they could not !


 I think the goal was to tell normal humans they should not.  The statement "You are not a Cow" on a social media post is hardly something I would expect to find in FDA guidance to physicians.  No reasonable person would think a Twitter post is how the FDA directs physicians to act, which by the way is something they don't have authority to do anyway.

 Should they be held accountable?  Yes.  Should we falsely claim a social media post was an unauthorized directive to physicians?  No.  Choose the right battle, be honest and say their information influenced the Employers of physicians.

 No.
 Information.
 In your reference indicates the FDA has changed positions.  You were lied to about that.  But if you Observe it, you can't keep making the false claim that the "science" changed.

 Why aren't you pissed at the employer of these doctors that fired them?

 Why are other doctors that, to this day, that prescribe Ivermectin for Covid still working?  Why hasn't the FDA gotten them fired?

 Why do you consider a Twitter post from the FDA to be a directive to physicians?


 The FDA obviously is presenting an agenda, but you don't need to misrepresent information that anyone could read and interpret themselves as false.  Nobody is fooled when you use lies to show the truth.

So you are saying there wasn't a push to make it so Ivermectin was not used?

 No.  I've never said - or implied - anything like that.

 I am saying that the information you are providing here is not the FDA "REVERSING" positions.  You were lied to about that.  You were lied to.

 I mean how can you even think they REVERSED positions when Your own post says they did not?

 The information is specific to a social media post where the FDA compared humans to Cows and said to "Stop it".  This is not a directive to doctors.  However, the Employer of these physicians fired them anyway.

 No reasonable person would think a Twitter/Facebook post from the FDA is a directive to physicians (something they can not do anyway).

 Blame the FDA for what they actually did, not the made up garbage they they did not do.

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 08/13/23 at 07:05:18:

They "sang" that was not effective.
Now they've changed their tune to, "It's not effective but use it if you want to"
They added a verse.
In support of the right to be stupid  

Why was it not allowed before?


 Seriously man.  It WAS allowed.  You were LIED to about that.  Tons and tons of prescriptions prove it is allowed.  But if you Observe this you cant keep claiming they REVERSED their stance.

 The FDA has not Authorized Ivermectin for Covid treatment.  This does not mean it can not be prescribed for it.    You were LIED to about that restriction, or don't understand how this works.

 Tons of drugs, daily, are prescribed for diseases they are not Authorized to treat, known as off-label treatment.  There's a good chance this even happened to You.  Your website reference removed that part about OLT.

 The FDA has NOT REVERSED their opinion or Authorization on Ivermectin.  That is different than the Emergency Authorization stuff.


 You are right about the Alternative Treatment stuff regarding Emergency Use.

 You are Wrong that Ivermectin could not be prescribed to treat Covid legally, which means you are wrong that the FDA REVERSED their stance.  You were LIED to about that.