Will the FDA finally be held accountable for attacking ivermectin on Twitter?
By ethanh // 2023-09-06
Copy
 
There is a really good chance that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will finally be held accountable for trying to stop Americans from taking ivermectin during the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) "pandemic." The very same lawsuit that forced the FDA to admit that it has no legal authority to prohibit Americans from taking ivermectin is also expected to deliver a judgment of punishment against the corrupt federal agency once all the dust settles. An appeals court judge just ruled that the three doctor plaintiffs behind the suit can proceed with their case against the FDA, which alleges that the agency greatly overstepped its bounds with anti-ivermectin messaging to the American public. "The FDA is not a physician," Judge Don Willett from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, wrote in his ruling. "It has authority to inform, announce and appraise – but not to endorse, denounce, or advise." "Left unmentioned in most of that messaging: ivermectin also comes in a human version." (Related: At the height of COVID, we conducted a fact check showing that the FDA first approved ivermectin for human use back in 1996 – it is not just for barnyard animals.)

Should the FDA be disbanded entirely?

Judge Willett's statements about the FDA conveniently failing to ever mention that ivermectin is a human drug as well as a livestock drug points to the infamous message that the FDA tweeted during COVID that tried to make it seem like ivermectin is only for animals. "You are not a horse," the FDA mocked in the tweet. "You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all. Stop it." The FDA also tweeted a link to an entire article telling Americans not to take ivermectin, and once again failing to mention that the FDA itself approved ivermectin for human use nearly 30 years ago. "The 'experts' failed you during COVID," commented conservative stalwart Charlie Kirk about the matter. "Never again." "The doctors have plausibly alleged that FDA's posts fell on the wrong side of the line between telling about and telling to," Judge Willett further wrote for a panel that also included Jennifer Walker Elrod and Edith Brown Clement. The three doctors who filed the suit include Drs. Robert L. Apter, Mary Talley Bowden and Paul E. Marik. All three say they were harmed by the FDA's anti-ivermectin campaign, and Bowden specifically stated that she lost her privileges at a Texas hospital because of the FDA's illicit behavior and messaging. Prior to reaching the appeals court, Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, tossed out the case, arguing that the FDA holds "sovereign immunity," a legal principle that more often than not shields U.S. government agencies against civil lawsuits related to their duties. Judge Willett, however, disagrees. He says the FDA's clear overreach could make the agency vulnerable to legal action, which is what the three doctors aim to achieve, to the fullest extent of the law. "It's high time that these ghoulish agencies are held accountable for the evil they unleashed," commented Revolver news about the case. "If ivermectin has efficacy, which it does, then the Emergency Use Authorization for the vaccines was invalid," noted another about Operation Warp Speed. "They, the drug companies, would have had to do full longitudinal studies." The FDA could go down in history as one of the most corrupt government agencies to ever exist. Learn more at FDA.news. Sources for this article include: Revolver.news NaturalNews.com
Copy