If there was still any question about whether the AMA and "nonprofits" that ostensibly exist to improve medical care had patient and doctor interests at heart, this should resolve it
If there was still any question about whether the AMA and "nonprofits" that ostensibly exist to improve medical care had patient and doctor interests at heart, this should resolve it
Below the AMA presser I show why all the arguments against ivermectin are specious and deadly
Press Release: AMA, Wisconsin Med file amicus to oppose ivermectin as a court ordered treatment for COVID
Dec 7, 2022
MADISON, Wis. — In a case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court that seeks to force physicians to provide substandard care, the American Medical Association (AMA) and Wisconsin Medical Society (WisMed) today filed an amicus brief (PDF) arguing against ivermectin as a court ordered intervention for COVID-19 as the drug has not proven effective against the disease.
The amicus brief in Gahl v. Aurora Health notes that ivermectin is not within the standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 and warned against the court compelling the use of a drug that medical consensus finds is unsupported by available medical evidence and discouraged by federal agencies and health authorities.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention and the Food & Drug Administration have issued advisories indicating that ivermectin is not authorized or approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. While the National Institutes of Health, World Health Organization, and Merck—the manufacturer of ivermectin—all state there is insufficient evidence to support the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19.
The AMA and WisMed stated in the brief, “The overwhelming majority of studies investigating ivermectin have not found it to be an effective COVID-19 treatment. The few dissenting studies that exist have ‘substantially evaporated under close scrutiny’ and even ivermectin’s [former manufacturer, Merck] manufacturer ‘do[es] not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin for preventing or treating COVID-19. Thus, the consensus view of reasonable medical providers is that, apart from clinical trials, ivermectin should not be administered to treat COVID-19.”
Patients are encouraged to talk to their physicians about therapies authorized or approved for the treatment of COVID-19. These important conversations have been greatly complicated by misinformation about ivermectin and COVID-19. To provide patients with competent treatment, the AMA and WisMed urged the court to acknowledge the standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 does not require physicians to administer ivermectin.
Spurred by a mission to promote the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health, the AMA continues to work in the courts to support evidence-based measures that reduce the risk of infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19 and ensure the health and safety of our nation’s workforces, families, and communities.
The AMA took in $460 million in revenues in 2021. It also worked against the public’s health, actually bragging about how “as one of the nation’s leading voices for science and vaccination, the AMA fought through the courts to uphold
vaccine requirements for health care workers and others,
and we joined forces with other top organizations and
the Ad Council to promote a sweeping public education
campaign to build confidence in the safety and efficacy
of vaccines.”
But the AMA has become big on equity and combatting racism suddenly.
The AMA worked collaboratively to develop programs,
resources and strategies to embed racial justice and
advance health equity, improve outcomes for historically
marginalized populations that suffered disproportionately
during the pandemic, and educate physicians about
longstanding health inequities and their impact on people
and communities.
The leadership of the AMA is paid very equitably, see below.
https://nonprofitlight.com/il/chicago/american-medical-association
One wonders how much the feds paid the AMA for its newfound piousness and willingness to try and destroy doctors who didnt pay allegiance to the narrative, destroy ivermectin, etc.?
Here is the wonderful compilation of all studies of ivermectin for covid, and at the c19study.com website you can look up all studies on all major COVID treatment s being used. No matter how these studies are sliced and diced, they show the drug’s benefit:
If you want to learn about how literature was faked to make ivermectin appear to be ineffective, Aleandros Marinos and Phil Harper are the best people to read:
https://substack.com/profile/11624209-alexandros-marinos
https://philharper.substack.com/p/the-full-ivermectin-series-now-sharable
And here is an extraordinary document issued by the Nebraska AG, Doug Peterson, who issued a binding opinion that doctors could prescribe and pharmacists could dispense ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine without fear of reprisals in Nebraska. Particularly important, beginning on page 20 is the AG’s analysis of the bogus and contradictory claims regarding IVM and HCQ by the US public health agencies. Hold onto your hat if you have not seen this wonderful document before!
Too bad the medical nonprofits are blinded by someone’s largesse and unable to read the facts about the drugs and vaccines they not only shove down our throats, but about the drugs they are trying to stop patients from accessing. The lies are just so big, people cannot fathom they could be happening. But they are. Please share the Big Lie concept with your friends!
But they have no problem with hospitals killing patients with Remdesivir.
The AMA is completely controlled by big pharma. The AMA controls the medical school study curriculum and it's very much pro drugs and anti-health and cures. On a par with the CDC, FDA and NIH as far as any ethical practices are concerned...all are in the gutter.