Stew Cook
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2018
- Messages
- 8,258
- Likes
- 3,593
The example I'm using here is Michigan. In that state the governor IS standing in the way of this drug being used for Covid-19 treatment. I have a really hard time with that. Do you support what she's doing?
It's not how I would go about it necessarily, but given the conditions of supply issues, limiting it to medical conditions of which it is currently approved for seems legally sound, while it addresses the alleged abuse that was occurring. Again, this really falls on the FDA to approve it.
How many physicians participating in the trials would not be allowed to administer the drug to CV-19 patients? I don't know this answer, but I'm guessing it depends on how it's being conducted.
How man physicians would be allowed to prescribe it, without oversight, to anyone they wanted without this declaration? I'd guess all of them.
How much would be available right now, for virtually anyone? I'd say close to none.
Without controls the clinical tests would suffer, creating data gaps and unnecessary supply shortages, which amount to delayed approval from the FDA, but that's just how I see it.
BTW, if your grandmother has arthritis, prescribing it to her doesn't appear as if it would be prohibited, but getting some might be another story.
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/...cribing_and_Dispensing_3-24-2020_684869_7.pdf
Last edited: