Publishes legal opinion as hospitals refuse treatments for COVID-19
Art Moore
WND News Center
Asked to provide a legal opinion on hospitals in the state banning doctors from prescribing certain treatments for COVID-19, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson concluded doctors have the authority to prescribe drugs for the disease “off-label,” such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
“Our doctors, as well as their patients, need to know that doctors have the right to make important medical decisions, as long as they have the informed consent of their patients,” Wilson said in a statement announcing the opinion, as FITSNews reported.
“In fighting COVID, the doctor should be given the broadest possible leeway,” he said.
The opinion came in response to a request from South Carolina Republican state Sens. Shane Martin and Bill Taylor.
The lawmakers said “hospitals across our state are refusing to allow doctors to prescribe, or their hospital pharmacies to dispense, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, or other ‘off-label use medication’ for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.”
They wanted the AG to weigh in on Wilson whether there was “any prohibition” to doctors prescribing for COVID-19 drugs meant for another purpose that were found to be effective against the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Dr. Peter McCullough, a prominent cardiologist and epidemiologist, praised Wilson’s support for doctors.
McCullough noted on Twitter that he testified to the South Carolina Senate Committee on Medical Affairs, giving “the evidence base for these medications in the early treatment of the illness.”
He said the move will stop pharmacists blocking doctor’s prescriptions for the off-label drugs.
Wilson, in his opinion, argued the “physician-patient relationship is given constitutional dimension by the courts and broad – if not absolute – deference in a doctor’s prescribing medications to his or her patient, whether such prescriptions relate to off-label use or not.”
He pointed out that “courts have expressed time and again a reluctance to interfere in the doctor-patient relationship or in the policies of a hospital.”
“The physician who prescribes a drug for ‘off-label’ use is acting in accordance with generally accepted medical practice, as we understand it, and courts have so held,” Wilson said.
The state lawmaker Martin praised Wilson as “the only statewide elected official to protect the rights of doctors and patients.”
He told FITSNews the “the hospitals which have ignored the law and harmed patients to stop – right now.”
Taylor said the AG’s opinion “bolsters the stance of brave doctors who have secretly treated patients with ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, steroids, heavy vitamin doses, and other methods to combat COVID.”
“These doctors have been threatened by their accreditation agencies and hospitals for using successful treatments that have saved lives,” the state senator said. “Most hospitals have adhered to the ever-fluid CDC protocols, which limit treatment. Families know that having a loved one placed on a ventilator is an almost certain death sentence.”
Also read:
- Opinion: Why Bob Ferguson is wrong and what SMF is doing about it
Silent Majority Foundation challenges Bob Ferguson over alleged rights violations in federal lawsuit. - Silent Majority Foundation files lawsuit on behalf of former state employees who were terminated under policy requiring a COVID-19 vaccineSilent Majority Foundation files a lawsuit on behalf of former state employees alleging constitutional violations over a COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
- Letter: New movie on COVID vaccine victims deserves a watchRichard Beamish discusses the documentary on COVID vaccine victims, urging viewers to watch.
- Vancouver screening scheduled of ‘Vaxxed III: Authorized to Kill’Vancouver screening of ‘Vaxxed III: Authorized to Kill’ scheduled for Sept. 18 at Vancouver Mall 23.
- Study: Risk for getting COVID rises with each shot
A new report from the Epoch Times warns that the more COVID shots an individual has taken, the higher the risk of getting COVID. - ‘That’s a scandal’: CDC knew COVID shots caused deaths, but lied with public denialsA new report from the Epoch Times reveals its investigation shows that the CDC knew of the links between the COVID shots and death – and lied about them.
- FDA agrees to remove anti-ivermectin posts off the internet in lawsuit settlementThe Food and Drug Administration has reportedly settled a lawsuit brought by three doctors who accused the health regulator of interfering with their ability to practice medicine and prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID.
- No good news about student learning on 4-year anniversary of COVID school closuresFour years ago this month, schools nationwide shut down as COVID-19 numbers skyrocketed and students were sent home for what was initially planned to be two weeks.
Although quacks abound, and events like COVID seem to squeeze them from every nook and cranny, I think we all agree that our relationship with our doctors should be 100% private and protected–whether we want to eat horse medicine or stop a pregnancy.
Hospitals are a bit of another matter. Those doctors hold hospital liability in their hands, so hospitals need to be able to set minimum care standards. It seems they are safe so long as doctors have solid science backing their choices of treatment, but it’s not so clear otherwise.
Consider: Grandma has symptoms of a stroke so you rush her to the hospital. The doctor you see is a naturopath and instead of the usual clot-busting medications, she chooses to “bleed” your Granma by cutting several veins in order to “lower her blood pressure.”
Grandma will die, the hospital will be sued. Hospitals must be able to protect themselves from such calamities.
…but then, we’re not talking about “your” doctor here; we’re talking about a ER doctor.
Are you equating ivermectin and HQC with “bleeding” someone?
what does that have to do with the article? If you want to believe something is ineffective, don’t take it. keep your bigoted opinions to yourself thankyou.
what does that have to do with the article? If you want to believe something is ineffective, don’t take it. keep your bigoted opinions to yourself
Still baffles me how a person still doesn’t know there’s a pharmaceutical grade, with 4 billion doses prescribed for ‘people’, not horses, worldwide to date, of ivermectin which is what these ‘quack’ MDs are treating with, with great results. –Otherwise, seemingly intelligent people, or who may think they are, but lose all credibility when they refer to ivermectin as ‘horse medicine’, MDs using it (as early treatment along with other medications, vitamins and supplements) as ‘quacks’ and patients who opt for that regiment as ‘eating horse medicine’. If you don’t know there’s a pharmaceutical grade ivermectin you should bow out of the conversation.
Of course Scott jumps in with his usual negativity and dismissive left leaning comments. Of course doctors should have the option to use alternative medicines especially with their patients wanting to try something different. It is called consent and the patient can sign to it.
Off label prescriptions of medications has a long history in the medical profession. Often a use for a medication is found, and after many positive outcomes is discussed among doctors, for a medication that was “approved” by the FDA for some other purpose. Often, such medications do not offer the profits (that is, their patent protection has expired) so no medical manufacturer wishes to spend the considerable funds necessary to gain FDA “approval” for a new purpose that has been discovered through doctor’s experience. There is no incentive to invest in further approval since any manufacturer can then make the medicine, and sell it without having spent the funds to get approval.
With very little research effort, you can probably find dozens if not hundreds of medical compounds where this situation applies. (Or just ask your doctor.)
The SHOCK was that the powers that be decided to block use of “horse medicine” (that has been used in humans for years as a anti-parasite medication in third-world countries) when there was some indication that it *might* be helpful as a treatment for COVID-19. (I note that some reports have found the COVID response was most notable for patients living in areas where they might have picked up parasites — so the COVID benefit may have been an improvement caused by eliminating parasites allowing a stronger patient response to the COVID.)
Since the use of “off label” medications is extremely wide spread, it is unlikely that hospitals (including ER doctors) would be at any greater risk of lawsuit for use of medications in “off label” situations than when any other medication is used. Off label use it very common and anyone who’s taken more than a few medications is likely to have had an “off label” prescription without even knowing it. (Indeed, Doctors are not obligated to explain that any particular medication is “off label” so long as it is considered a “standard” treatment when prescribed.)
I heartily agree, I have seen ivermectin save lives. Hospitalizations are the problem. In my town in 2021, 3 patients died in the ICU during Christmas week. The only patient that survived was given ivermectin by her husband without the staff knowing it. Stay out of the hospital, Ivermectin is a lot safer than Remdesivir, Dexamethasone, Vancomycin and ventilators. Avoid Big Pharma. Take responsibility for doing the research about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine before you line up for the jab. This study shows children getting upper respiratory conditions AFTER taking the vaccine. https://vigilantfox.substack.com/p/evidence-suggests-the-covid-shots.