Super-Chevy454
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
Crap, that buckeye hospital who doesn't want to give ivermectin to a patient is allowed to stop the treatment.
reason.com

Ohio Hospital Allowed To Stop Treating COVID-19 Patient With Ivermectin
Plus: Student-professor relationships and Title IX, web hosts reject abortion snitch website, and more...

An Ohio hospital will no longer be legally compelled to treat a COVID-19 patient with the anti-parasite drug ivermectin. While the drug has recently become popular on the right as a remedy for COVID-19, such use is discouraged by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency. ("The bottom line is that while ivermectin might have some marginal efficacy, it is certainly not a 'miracle drug' when it comes to treating COVID-19," writes Reason's Ron Bailey after reviewing the evidence.)
The case involves Ohio resident Jeffrey Smith, who was admitted to the West Chester Hospital, near Cincinnati, back in July. After his condition continued to worsen, wife Julie Smith obtained an ivermectin prescription for her husband from Fred Wagshul, a doctor unaffiliated with the hospital. When the hospital said it wouldn't treat Jeffrey Smith with ivermectin—which is used as a deworming drug in animals and also used to treat some parasitic infections in humans—Julie Smith sued, seeking an injunction against the hospital to make it administer ivermectin.
In an August 23 ruling, a judge held that the hospital must try the treatment. "West Chester Hospital shall immediately administer Ivermectin to Jeffrey Smith," Butler County Judge J. Gregory Howard wrote, issuing a 14-day temporary injunction.
But a new decision—from Butler County Common Pleas Judge Michael A. Oster Jr.—reverses course. Oster said West Chester Hospital does not have to continue treating Smith with ivermectin.
"This Court is not making a decision on the effectiveness of ivermectin. Rather, the question is" whether Smith had "met her burden to be entitled to a preliminary injunction under Ohio law," wrote Oster in a decision issued yesterday. He didn't think Smith had.
"After Judge Howard's ruling, but before a hearing could be held before Judge Oster, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), American Medical Association (AMA), American Pharmacists 'Association (APhA) and the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) all issued statements or advisories against the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19," the judge pointed out. And "while there are some doctors and studies that tend to lend support to ivermectin…the studies that tend to give support to ivermectin have had inconsistent results, limitations to the studies, were open label studies, were of low quality or low certainty, included small sample sizes, various dosing regimens, or have been so riddled with issues that the study was withdrawn." It's clear "the medical community does not support the use of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19 at this time."