Home Unbiased and uncensored debate Covid-19 Evolution of EUAs to Physician’s Authorized Prescription, Not National Decision

  • Evolution of EUAs to Physician’s Authorized Prescription, Not National Decision

  • TheRealRestoreInc.

    November 18, 2021 at 10:36 am

    This is important, so I posted it again.

    “Pfizer requests Emergency Use Authorization for blah blah blah…”

    Emergency use authorization…is it evolved to the fullest, best expression of practical medical response by authority?

    What about a single patient in CCU in a hospital’s request? A plea for a life saving interception by the DEFENSE team consisting of a compassionate physician and an attorney?

    Pfizer is a corporate person who has no more rights than a single patient trying to find a way to stay alive.

    Pfizer had no right to an

    “EUA access” more than a natural person.

    An Emergency Use Authorization is a cookbook response with risk/benefit ratio. Pfizer has no constitutional rights to have preferred approval for use of a treatment.

    An EUA is an EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE response in the worst way…who came up with, “we can’t authorize medical treatments in an emergency if there are EUA-authorized treatments” (instigated by Pfizer, Modern, J&J, Merck, and the Referring maker, for example)?

    Who invented the notion that if there is no approved cure for COVID-19, that NO cure could be used without FDA/CDC/NIH/HHS approval?
    The”EUA” concept should be disassembled and reborn as a constitutional right for individual patients instead of a national POLICY.

    This is how it works:

    Rights of patients are already existent, natural – in pursuit of life, and liberty from disease, (I.e., the ESCAPE from COVID-19, and the right to choose a life-saving medicine and an anti-viral method of treatment).

    That simple. THANKS for listening.
    Ivermectin would be approved at the physician’s authority to practice emergency use.

Viewing 1 of 1 replies

Original Post
0 of 0 posts June 2018