The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) filed its motion and amicus brief Thursday evening with the federal district court in Galveston, urging it to allow the lawsuit to proceed against the FDA for its misleading statements against ivermectin. In Apter v. HHS, a group of physicians sued to hold the Food and Drug Administration, a federal agency within the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), accountable for its interference with physicians’ ability to treat Covid-19.
“Defendant FDA has improperly exploited misunderstandings about the legality and prevalence of off-label uses of medication, in order to mislead courts, state medical boards, and the public into thinking there is anything improper about off-label prescribing,” AAPS writes in its amicus brief to the court. “Not only is off-label prescribing fully proper, legal, and commonplace, but it is also absolutely necessary in order to give effective care to patients.”
Yet, the FDA published multiple statements and sent letters to influential organizations to falsely disparage ivermectin, implying that it was not approved for treating Covid-19. Many, including courts and state medical boards, were misled by the FDA into thinking that its lack of approval for this treatment meant that ivermectin should not be used to treat Covid-19.
“It has never been proper for the FDA to interfere with that essential part of the practice of medicine, and the FDA knows it,” AAPS informed the court. The FDA “insisted and continues to insist on interfering with the prescription of this safe medication by physicians in treating Covid-19,” AAPS added.
AAPS General Counsel Andrew Schlafly pointed out to the court that the FDA “has engaged in a campaign of interference with the proper use by physicians of ivermectin, which has long been approved as fully safe for human use.” He alerted the court that once the FDA approves a medication as safe, then physicians have full authority to prescribe it to treat any illness, particularly a novel virus like Covid-19.
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a national organization representing physicians in all specialties since 1943. Its motto is omnia pro aegroto (everything for the patient).
Silence of the Sheep
American medicine has become unmoored from its scientific and ethical anchors, as I have previously discussed. We abandoned real science for the pseudo-scientific cult of evidence-based medicine. This grave error paved the way for the medical tyranny we are currently enduring, with no apparent end in sight. But the wholesale abandonment of medical ethics is a far more serious problem. After all, ethics predates our scientific understanding of medicine by millennia! Ethics are based on morality, not legality. Morality and legality are not interchangeable. We should not be able to redefine ethics to accommodate current law or fads. Otherwise, medicine quickly becomes a tool of the state.
The Oath of Hippocrates remains the purest expression of medical ethics, and I encourage all to review it. Note that the precise wording “primum non nocere” or “first do no harm,” a core ethical principle attributed by some to Hippocrates, is not in the Oath, but the concept is there, along with the duty to teach and to honor one’s teachers, to consult learned colleagues, to devote one’s attention and art to the patient, to keep confidentiality, to respect life, and specifically never to kill, either via euthanasia or abortion! There’s not a word in the Oath about following guidelines and protocols.
It’s no wonder the Oath has been revised, disrespected, or ignored by the unethical elites who dominate Medicine. The modern practice of medicine would leave Hippocrates appalled!
I am a witness to the degradation of Medicine; it was largely self-inflicted. Perhaps the first step down the slippery slope was the surrender, without so much as a whimper, of medical confidentiality. Agreeing to provide confidential patient information to the various third-party payers was a gross violation of medical ethics. Accepting third-party payment is itself unethical, as it can create conflicts of interest that diminish allegiance to the patient. Direct payment is the only truly ethical system of physician compensation. We need to reestablish confidentiality at the same level as the lawyer-client, pastor-parishioner, and journalist-source, relationships.
Abortion is the killing of a human being in utero. It is clearly unethical and immoral. Legalization of abortion should not have impacted the ethical prohibition against this horrific procedure. The silent acquiescence to abortion by the American Medical Association, and others, created an indelible stain on the medical profession. Contrary to popular opinion, there are no legitimate “health of the mother” indications for abortion. Induction of labor or Cesarian section is almost always an option, even with severe eclampsia. Physicians who perform abortions are in gross violation of medical ethics.
The worldwide mass “vaccination” program is an egregious violation of medical ethics. People were coerced into taking an experimental gene-based product without any long-term safety data, and with alarming short-term safety signals. Informed consent to take part in this massive experiment was nonexistent. All physicians should have refused to go along, on ethical and scientific grounds.
The latest affront to medical ethics, and science, is the transgender movement. The notion of “gender” independent of biological sex is a scientific absurdity, as is the toxic idea that puberty-blocking drugs and mutilating surgery can change gender. Gender dysphoria is a most often a transient condition of adolescence or pre-adolescence. It should be addressed by psychotherapy, not highly toxic drugs or surgery. Removal of healthy organs by medical or surgical castration and mastectomy is a gross violation of primum non nocere and clearly unethical.
Filmmaker and journalist Matt Walsh reports on the gender transformation clinic at Nashville’s Vanderbilt University Hospital:
In 2018, Dr. Shayne Taylor explained how she convinced Nashville to get into the gender transition game by emphasizing that it’s a “big moneymaker,” especially because the surgeries require a lot of “follow-ups.” Dr. Ellen Clayton warned that “conscientious objections” are “problematic.” Anyone who decides not to be involved in transition surgeries due to “religious beliefs” will face “consequences.” After they have drugged and sterilized the kids, Vanderbilt will happily perform double mastectomies on adolescent girls.
Apparently, in response to Walsh’s report, Vanderbilt has deleted the entire transgender website.
Why are the sheep that now pose as physicians silent on this travesty? I am calling on all remaining ethical physicians to speak out loudly against the mutilation of our children.
Doctors must defend life, and reject procedures that are entirely without benefit, and that inflict considerable harm.
Medical ethics has become an oxymoron. If we are to save the medical profession, we must restore real Hippocratic ethics as a first priority.
RichLDNRD Dietitian Nutritionist Pediatric Specialist 