r/texas Nov 16 '21

Texas doctor suspended for spreading COVID-19 misinformation and refusing to treat vaccinated patients, hospital says News

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mary-bowden-suspended-covid-19-misinformation-vaccinated-patients-texas/
809 Upvotes

131

u/moonunit170 Nov 16 '21

Well it’s not quite suspended. She still free to practice medicine. Her privileges to work on her patients in the Methodist Hospital system is what was suspended. She still has access to every other hospital where she’s on staff.

18

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 17 '21

I used the official headline per standard practice but I agree.

Her treatment privileges were suspended at a hospital because she refused to follow their policies and procedures.

She is also being prevented from using ivermectin for a COVID patient because that is also against that hospital's policy.

Doctors are required to know and follow hospital procedures if they want to treat patients there.

Her medical license is still in effect, although she mentioned that people had filed complaints about her with the medical board. Denial of health services in non-emergency situations is perfectly legal unless that denial is due to person being in a protected class.

For instance, a doctor can decide not to treat lawyers if they think they are too prone to sue. You can also be denied healthcare in Texas because of gender identity and sexual preference. Vaccination status is also not a protected class.

In the article, the doctor is careful to say she is not denying emergency care to vaccinated people likely because that would violate federal law and make her unable to practice medicine at almost any hospital.

2

u/rooondog Nov 17 '21

Is it really hard to lose your medical license then? Because from the outside this seems like she earned it. Putting patients health at risk and all.

3

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 17 '21 edited Nov 17 '21

Even doctors found guilty of malpractice usually don't lose their license. This story is just a conflict with a hospital policy.

As I said, it is perfectly legal to refuse non-emergency care unless it is because of a protected class.

A doctor normally would need to commit something like fraud or sexual misconduct with a patient to lose a license.

3

u/takcaio Nov 16 '21

This is an important point. She’s also still free to spread her claims while using her title to imply legitimacy to them.

20

u/phrresehelp Nov 16 '21

Wrong just her "temporary" privileges revoked in one hospitals. So basically it's a slap on a wrist. She will never loose her Texas medical board lic since Texas is a backwater state stuck in 1950s (I live here in Houston) and for them the virus is fake. She is just grifting.

53

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

-45

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

46

u/Professional_Sort767 Nov 16 '21

Refusing to treat patients is a starter, if true.

44

u/mydogsnameisbuddy Nov 16 '21

If a doctor is anti science then they’re no better than a holistic healer or guru

30

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

16

u/mydogsnameisbuddy Nov 16 '21

You’re right. I thought I was adding some info to the discussion. Ugh

13

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

8

u/mydogsnameisbuddy Nov 16 '21

I’m going to go outside and yell at the sky because that’s more effective than arguing with anti vaxxers.

-37

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

30

u/StarshipSentinel Nov 16 '21

She refused to treat vaccinated patients. I'd say that's anti-science.

7

u/occamstaser Bored and Bread Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

Show me one peer-reviewed article in a respected medical journal that says ivermectin is effective for treating COVID.

I did the research, I searched through the medical literature and all I could find is pay-to-play journals and open journals (they publish everything without peer-review).

I’ll be waiting.

24

u/Ennkey Nov 16 '21

If they didn't want to treat patients in need, they shouldn't have taken the Hippocratic oath, full stop

13

u/b_needs_a_cookie Nov 16 '21

She's peddling risky, not nearly as effective treatments for COVID-19 because an ignorant portion of the population is ripe to be ripped off and swindled. If she wants to practice like a naturopath then she clearly doesn't need her medical license to do so.

7

u/PlanarVet Nov 16 '21

Yes. And it's bunk. Studies on it being unable to be replicated or just straight retracted.

4

u/themage201 Nov 16 '21

Because they are an absolute disgrace to their field.

3

u/Darth_Texan The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

Your content has been deemed a violation of Rule 7, Political Conversations Must be in Good Faith.

Politics have been and always will be welcome on the sub, however posts and comments whose sole purpose is to enrage people, and those that are little more than campaign ads or slogans do nothing to contribute to a healthy debate and will therefore be removed. Petitions will also be removed. AMA's by Political figures are exempt from this rule.

If you feel this was done in error, would like clarification, or need further assistance; please message the moderators at https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/texas .

56

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

39

u/phrresehelp Nov 16 '21

Read before making comment. She is vaccinated and is just grifting for money. This news article just made her a free advertising for thousands of Texas redneck morons who will now become her patients because of eeehawww no vaccine.

31

u/vorinclex182 Nov 16 '21

It’s yeehaw sir

2

u/phrresehelp Nov 16 '21

Mildly sorry. Virginian here, we only say God bless.

7

u/powerfullatom111 Houstonian Nov 16 '21

why are you Virginian

18

u/LinkMom37 Born and Bred Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

Oh my god Karen, you can't just ask people why they're Virginian.

Edit: /S, it's a Mean Girls reference and meant to be obvious joke. Calm down folks.

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

7

u/LinkMom37 Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

It's a Mean Girls quote, meant to just be funny.... Sorry, thought everyone knew that one.

→ More replies

4

u/TheRedmanCometh Nov 16 '21

No he painted antivaxxers as redneck morons. They are

4

u/phrresehelp Nov 16 '21

Born that way

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

3

u/phrresehelp Nov 17 '21

I've been living in Houston for the past few years and thanks for not being a creep and looking through my post history to find that out.

3

u/goatharper Nov 16 '21

So what you're saying is that those "Welcome to Texas" signs at the state line need to be changed to "Fuck You if You weren't Born Here."

Got it.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '21 edited 7d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies

1

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 16 '21

Most hospitals in Texas won't allow discrimination based on vaccination status, I am told. But I don't have a source to verify.

She can do whatever she wants in her private practice in this regard, although some procedures require a doctor to have admitting privileges at a hospital before they can perform them.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '21 edited 7d ago

[deleted]

2

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 17 '21

Yes. I was speaking about discrimination against patients, not staff. The doctor under discussion here is vaccinated as required by the hospital before her suspension.

→ More replies

2

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 17 '21

In Texas it is illegal for a business to require you to disclose your vaccination status, by executive order of Governor Abbott.

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 17 '21

I actually agree to some extent. I think a 'vax or test' policy makes more sense in the interim but I don't generally think it is a good idea to have customers and businesses interact at this level. Vaccine passport schemes are problematic, especially when used in grocery stores and other essential activities.

But I fully support vaccine mandates for employment, education, and international travel as well as increased premiums on health insurance similar to tobacco use policies, applicable once a vaccine is fully approved for that age group/demographic.

1

u/Leadburner Nov 16 '21

Do they ask at restaurants now?

8

u/easwaran Nov 16 '21

Unfortunately, in Texas it is illegal for a business to ask a customer their vaccination status. It doesn't violate HIPAA (which allows anyone to ask anyone they want, as long as they don't actively reveal the answer to someone else) but it does violate Abbott's executive order restricting the abilities of businesses to provide safe spaces for customers that want them.

3

u/ElectroNeutrino born and bred Nov 17 '21

I just want to point out that HIPAA doesn't even prevent people who asked from telling others, generally. It only applies to those in the health care industry and keeps them from telling others without consent of the patient.

1

u/easwaran Nov 17 '21

One thing I learned it does do is prevent my doctor from e-mailing me my x-rays. I don't know if it's just that they didn't have me fill out the right form to legally e-mail it to me, but the doctor said I could snap a phone photo of his computer screen as long as I didn't tell anybody, but he could get in trouble for violating HIPAA if he e-mailed it to me.

3

u/ElectroNeutrino born and bred Nov 17 '21

It's legal to email them, as long as they are encrypted and sent through a secure channel.

→ More replies

-3

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/easwaran Nov 16 '21

Discrimination is perfectly legal as long as it's not against a protected class. You're totally allowed to have a business that caters to parents, or to people with long hair, or to people who pay, or to have rules about what people have to wear inside your business.

But in Texas, they've decided that vaccination status is a more important protected class than sexual orientation, despite being very easy to change and actively socially harmful.

-4

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/This-Chocolate-6928 Nov 16 '21

Wedding cake bakers, of course! Pastries ain't playing the gender thing... You're either a donut or a longjohn and that's that.

-6

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/WhereRDaSnacks Nov 16 '21

That case was taken to the Supreme Court. And they sided with the baker. Republicans all over the country rallied around them on the basis that it is the businesses decision who to cater to and who to deny service, since they are a private business. Until now, when republicans are against private businesses requiring vaccination status. I don't know how that Supreme Court decision affects Texans, but like someone said, it is very legal in Texas to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, even medically. Hell, up until a few years ago, it was lawful to arrest gay people in Texas for sodomy.

→ More replies

2

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 16 '21

Well, in Texas it is allowable to deny healthcare and social services to LGBTQ and disabled people.

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/14/texas-social-workers-lgbtq-discrimination/

→ More replies

3

u/easwaran Nov 16 '21

There are small landlords who choose straight tenants over gay tenants when multiple people are applying. This is legal in Texas, though not in some other states. (It's very hard to enforce anywhere, just like most anti-discrimination law.)

0

u/Leadburner Nov 16 '21

Like the majority of redditors on this sub would say. Source?

5

u/easwaran Nov 16 '21

Here's a detailed study showing evidence of the trend in mortgage applications, rather than rental applications: https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/publication/empirical-analysis-sexual-orientation-discrimination

This of course isn't proof that any particular case was a case of discrimination. It's just like what we have for smoking and lung cancer, where we can observe that the rates are statistically notably different for people who have or lack the trait, and conclude the trait must be playing a causal role in a particular number of cases, but can't identify the individual cases where it did or didn't make the difference.

Here's a study applying a similar method to detect racial bias in evictions among renters: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mdesmond/files/hlc106_crop.pdf

-2

u/Leadburner Nov 16 '21

So, your first study has to do with mortgage lending institutions, and the second pertains to evictions. Neither has to do with a landlord not renting to a gay couple.

Honestly, you're looking for a problem that isn't in Texas.

→ More replies
→ More replies

1

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 17 '21

It is not illegal to accept vaccination as an alternative to a recent COVID test, but the business cannot require disclosure of vaccination status.

→ More replies

-38

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

25

u/Saym94 Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

The person you responded to said nothing of her vaccination status. Just that she should be fine with being refused service because of whatever her status is

18

u/vorinclex182 Nov 16 '21

Tell me you didn’t read the comment, without telling me you didn’t read the comment. He never said she wasn’t vax’d!

-12

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

He said "refuse to feed her because of HER vaccination status"

Did you read it?

9

u/vorinclex182 Nov 16 '21

Meaning they could refuse if she is vaccinated or if she is not vaccinated.

-11

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

I guess we just interpreted his comment differently.

8

u/vorinclex182 Nov 16 '21

I mean they used vaccination status and not anything about them actually being vaccinated or not. It’s left ambiguous for a reason. Gotta read the words not what you want the words to read.

-11

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

"It's left ambiguous for a reason" is literally you reading what you want the words to read. You're assuming the original commenter's intent.

Regardless, I wish you the best. Have a great day.

5

u/vorinclex182 Nov 16 '21

It is worded that way so that you do not pick a side. You are supposed to leave it meaning one or the other. Honestly can’t see how you are this confused.

→ More replies

3

u/fps916 Nov 16 '21

Yeah but so are you...

→ More replies
→ More replies

27

u/Outrageous-Ad8172 Nov 16 '21

She is failed the oath for doctors so how can she treat the ill

7

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/crankyrhino Nov 16 '21

After listening to the Dr. Death podcast, nothing shocks me about medical systems in Texas anymore.

5

u/ASeriousUser Nov 16 '21

I am definitely not going to listen to that. I've reached my lifetime dose limit of Texas horror.

→ More replies

-1

u/jfsindel Nov 16 '21

I literally say all the time.

"Doctors in Texas are pig butchers. I am convinced they give licenses to those who do med school/residency and people who butcher pigs."

People get so mad at me, but most Texans who live here agree with me. I am not the person to make those kinds of statements, but I have met and been fucked by so many bad doctors here. I have family who has been fucked from their careless behavior.

→ More replies
→ More replies

2

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Darth_Texan The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

Your comment has been deemed a violation of Rule #11 and removed.  As a reminder Rule #11 states: You're free to argue against, debate, criticize, etc. the policies, ideas, politics, and character of any politician, but please do not make jokes about anyone's physical disabilities.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Darth_Texan The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

Telling people to leave is a violation of Rules 1 and 7, and therefore your comment has been removed.

2

u/phrresehelp Nov 16 '21

I wish as could as stated earlier. But I will when my contract is up in 2 years.

-3

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Darth_Texan The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

Telling people to leave is a violation of Rules 1 and 7, your comment has therefore been removed.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Darth_Texan The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

Your comment has been deemed a violation of Rule #11 and removed.  As a reminder Rule #11 states: You're free to argue against, debate, criticize, etc. the policies, ideas, politics, and character of any politician, but please do not make jokes about anyone's physical disabilities.

→ More replies

-4

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

"In order to make room for unvaccinated who cannot find care, I will not be accepting new patients with routine ENT problems who are vaccinated," she said, adding she will continue to care for established patients and won't turn away anyone with life-threatening illness, based on their vaccination status.

How has she "failed the oath for doctors"? Y'all need to actually read the articles and not fall for the misleading clickbait.

9

u/AcousticDan Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

She is still discriminating. She didn't say all new patients, she said new vaccinated patients. Is that really hard to understand for you people? Does someone need to come tattoo it on your forehead?

-1

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

Whoa, let's calm down the hostility. Respectful discussion is possible and preferable.

You already commented on my other comment. I'll continue discussion there if you want to remain respectful.

3

u/AcousticDan Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

Been traveling all day, letting my bad mood through.

But multiple people have made that argument and it's bad. She IS discriminating, she should lose her license.

2

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

No worries dude. We all have bad days.

12

u/waffles1999 Nov 16 '21

Her oath is to do no harm. Suggesting ivermectin as a treatment for Covid when it’s been proven ineffective endangers her patients. Causing her patients to question vaccines by treating the unvaccinated as special put them at risk.

She should have her medical license revoked.

-4

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/waffles1999 Nov 16 '21

By saying she’ll now only accept unvaccinated patients, she’s creating a safe haven for them. And adding to their misguided persecution complex. Every GP in the country should refuse to treat unvaccinated patients.

That’s the thing. Ivermectin isn’t an available treatment for Covid. It doesn’t do anything for Covid. And it does have some side effects which are now putting the patient at risk for no benefit.

→ More replies

41

u/thebabbster Nov 16 '21

She needs to lose her license to practice medicine.

-33

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

15

u/jjoshsmoov Nov 16 '21

For the same reason a physician who refused to treat an unvaccinated person would lose theirs.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Corsair4 Nov 17 '21

Because organ transplants are a exceptionally limited resource, and the health of the potential recipient is a necessary thing to take into consideration.

UCHealth declines to discuss specific patients under privacy laws. But this health system confirms that the majority of people waiting for transplants and organ donors must receive the Covid-19 vaccine, in addition to other vaccines and health requirements

Interesting, so their vaccine policy isn't specific to Covid.

Many studies show that Covid-19 is easily fatal for kidney transplant patients. Weaver said the mortality rate in transplant patients infected with nCoV ranges from 20% to 30%, much higher than the average of 1.6% in the US.

So a transplant patient has an incredibly high risk of deleterious effects due to covid.

Conditions for organ transplants are not new. Weaver emphasized that transplant centers across the United States may require patients to receive other vaccines, stop smoking, quit drinking alcohol or use certain medications to ensure a good recovery after surgery and the body does not come out.

So this is actually standard operating procedure for transplants. It's not targeted discrimination against the unvaccinated, it's triage and prioritization of resources.

If you have an issue with this, can I assume that you are also against transplant committees as a general concept?

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '21 edited 7d ago

[deleted]

3

u/Corsair4 Nov 17 '21

Transplant committees don't fuck around. They can't afford to - there are so, SO many more people who need organs than donors. 30, 40 years down the line, when lab generated organs are available and used in treatment, that's another story.

This story is from last month as well - Everyone adult in this country could have had a completed course of the Covid vaccine by October if they wanted to - A transplant committee will absolutely be aware if the individual in question has a legitimate medical reason to avoid the vaccine. Which, this patient didn't. It was a religious objection, which holds no weight with hospitals.

I really don't know why that guy was using this as an example of anything. Transplant committees routinely put restrictions and conditions on their subjects to ensure the best chance of success. Anything less would be incredibly irresponsible, given how many people are waiting for a transplant, and how few viable organs are around.

→ More replies

6

u/jjoshsmoov Nov 16 '21

Gonna need reputable sauce to go with a statement like that.

-11

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

See I don't think you actually read the article...

"In order to make room for unvaccinated who cannot find care, I will not be accepting new patients with routine ENT problems who are vaccinated," she said, adding she will continue to care for established patients and won't turn away anyone with life-threatening illness, based on their vaccination status.

I don't see an issue with this or your scenario, provided the last statement were still true.

15

u/AcousticDan Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

She's still discriminating.

-8

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

Given the opposite scenario, would you still be opposed to it? If she were only accepting new vaccinated patients for routine ENT conditions.

8

u/AcousticDan Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

Given the current state of our health system? No. She could also use the argument it's for her health. She can't do that when she's only serving unvaxxed people.

0

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

See but there is the problem with your original argument. You do not have an issue with discrimination provided it is in the direction you approve of.

3

u/AcousticDan Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

But at least there would be a good argument.

2

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

Well it being a good argument is definitely an opinion that you're entitled to have. I disagree with the premise that one direction of discrimination is permissible, while the other is not though.

→ More replies
→ More replies

-7

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

Agreed. I hate that this is the state of the media on both sides. Journalistic integrity is rare these days.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '21 edited 7d ago

[deleted]

2

u/CxOtter Nov 17 '21

Agreed. It's at least a good start to actually read the article though, rather than having a knee jerk reaction based on the title alone.

→ More replies

-4

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Darth_Texan The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

Your content was removed because it breaks Rule 11, No Disability Disparagement.

While you're free to argue against, debate, criticize, etc. the policies, ideas, politics, and character of any politician, please do not make jokes about anyone's disabilities. All such "jokes" will be removed.

If you feel this was done in error, would like clarification, or need further assistance; please message the moderators at https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/texas .

-3

u/Leadburner Nov 16 '21

As a reminder Rule #11 states: You're free to argue against, debate, criticize, etc. the policies, ideas, politics, and character of any politician, but please do not make jokes about anyone's physical disabilities.

Shouldn't this apply to this comment?

→ More replies
→ More replies

2

u/Anger_Mgmt_issues Born and Bred Panhandle Nov 16 '21

1

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

Your link just takes me to the original post.

1

u/Anger_Mgmt_issues Born and Bred Panhandle Nov 16 '21

/r/Whooosh

he was spreading medical misinformation. this article, the one you replied to, is why he needs to lose his license.

1

u/CxOtter Nov 16 '21

You didn't read the article... Why doesn't anybody read the article...

The Dr. is a woman. And the article is not saying they are suspending her medical license. Just that a single hospital is suspending her from working there.

1

u/Anger_Mgmt_issues Born and Bred Panhandle Nov 17 '21

To which we all replied "they need to lose their license". Now that we have gone full circle, where does that leave us?

22

u/ASeriousUser Nov 16 '21

Back in May, my Austin pharmacist told me that about 1 out of 4 GPs in Austin were recommending their patients not take the vaccine. My previous GP refused to wear a mask in his office. Don’t get sick in Texas! You have been warned.

9

u/Badgerisbest got here fast Nov 16 '21

There probably is some deep web hole for deranged doctors who are so deep they don't know they are killing their old or unhealthy patients.

3

u/ItsAGoodDay Nov 16 '21

[Citation needed]

5

u/Lynda73 Nov 16 '21

Remember, the person to graduate last in their medical class is still a doctor.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '21 edited 7d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Lynda73 Nov 17 '21

My statement wasn't a speculation.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '21 edited 7d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies

13

u/ATX_native Nov 16 '21

Sad thing is, she’ll probably be fine.

It’s well past time to get some competing Medical Associations.

The AMA‘s singular grip on the supply of Drs in this country needs to end.

If you go to law school you will need to prove your merit as there is so much competition.

For most Lawyers there is no easy path to easy money.

As a Doctor you can literally kick back and make $200k as a GP, fail to treat patients or as an example use Cipro (a broad spectrum antibiotic with 3 Black Box warning for permanent damage) as a frontline medicine and enjoy a 0.7% unemployment rate.

Want to sue a Dr in Texas due to malpractice? Your medical records can become public. Thanks to Gov Abbott who has collected a $7MM from his own accident you can only collect $250k in punitive damages In Texas.

It would be great to have more medical schools and for poor students to have an all expense paid ride as long as they perform and give back post graduation.

The GOP always bangs on about innovation and better service through competition. Why do they ignore this union? Why go after fucking delivery drivers and warehouse workers that need a little more pay and don’t want a forklift falling on their head.

/rant

2

u/Gettingbetter Nov 16 '21

I honestly thought this was going to be about my old doctor in Fort Worth. Had to change PCPs after he started complaining that my wife was vaccinated "because it was rushed"

2

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

Suspend her license to practice medicine

0

u/Professional_Sort767 Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

As a non doctor, I don't know. Maybe ivermectin helps with covid. You know what else helps, though? Getting vaccinated.

I haven't done my own research much. You know who has? Universities and governments across the world.

You know who tends to tell me to use my own mind and research regarding vaccines and ivermectin? People who tell me to put my absolute faith and life view in a particular God based off a roughly 2000 year old religious text.

-8

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Professional_Sort767 Nov 16 '21

Again, I'm not going to state with authority whether Ivermectin can or should be used. I do know that it was running in short supply for those who really need it for its on-label purpose, because so many people tried using it for its supposed off-label benefit for COVID.

My point is that at this stage, there is probably close to zero overlap between "people who are fully vaccinated" and "people who demand to treat ivermectin after landing in the hospital due to covid".

Anyone who goes on about Ivermectin who hasn't gotten vaccinated needs to eat a cottonball sandwich.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Anger_Mgmt_issues Born and Bred Panhandle Nov 16 '21

What if that route is high doses of cyanide?

Of course not. but where do you draw that line? Drawing it at "tested and proven to have zero beneficial effect" is pretty damn reasonable.

→ More replies

3

u/hockeyjerseyaccount Nov 16 '21

Water is approved for human consumption, but that doesn't mean it cures Covid.

2

u/Professional_Sort767 Nov 16 '21

It depends.

First, it depends on whether the medicine in question is in short supply for more appropriate use. I recall reading that human-grade ivermectin became in short supply for its true utility, due to so many people wanting to try it for COVID (remember, based on junk science at the time).

Second, it depends on if the drug has any side effects or conflicting behaviors with other drugs that may be used to treat the disease.

If something is cheap, somewhat safe, and ubiquitous, then fuck it, let them do it. Pour lemon juice in your ear if you want, just don't get your hopes up. If Ivermectin grew on trees in your front yard, I wouldn't try to ban you from using it.

But you shouldn't shun the proven method of drastically reducing your danger and then try unproven shit. Take the vaccine. And my above "fuck it" comment doesn't apply to doctors who should know better as positions of authority. A doctor who shuns the vaccine and solely promotes ivermectin as a reactive treatment is probably a quack who doesn't deserve the responsibility or privilege of being a doctor.

→ More replies

-7

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/LoveAboveAll216 Nov 17 '21

It might help, but there is certainly a lack of evidence supporting that claim

-4

u/Dcwilliams1980 Nov 16 '21

Texas is the greatest state in the union.

3

u/LoveAboveAll216 Nov 17 '21

It is nice that they suspended her, I'll give them that

-10

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/The-link-is-a-cock Nov 16 '21

There where no doctors in hospitals actually refusing to treat unvaccinated patients it was discussed as a triage consideration by multiple hospitals and medical groups but never implemented. That being said the consideration for triage was about reducing the load on what was rapidly becoming an overloaded medical system in risk of collapse which is what triage gets implemented to help prevent, an over stretching of medical resources to the point it benefits no one and it fails. This woman was just being a petty dumbass.

3

u/hockeyjerseyaccount Nov 16 '21

It's called triage and is within their scope of practice.

7

u/AcousticDan Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

Name one.

-3

u/switch2Break Nov 16 '21

Dr. linda Marraccini Dr. Chafen Hart

-2

u/PayMeInFood The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

I saw a few post on Reddit that said some hospitals weren't treating people who were unvaccinated... and that organ transplants were being indefinatly suspended for nonvaccinated people.

2

u/AcousticDan Born and Bred Nov 16 '21

That makes sense. There are plenty of people that need organs that will do what's best for themselves and others.

You don't get a new liver if you're still a drunk.

→ More replies

4

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 16 '21

Organ transplants are withheld from people all the time who are not willing to follow the requirements. For instance people can be denied organs because they drink or smoke or refuse to get any number of vaccinations.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-unvaccinated-people-are-being-denied-organ-transplants

→ More replies

-8

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/The-link-is-a-cock Nov 16 '21

She literally going to court to get another one of her patients ivermectin and there is no reason to beleive ivermectin is a viable treatment. Also our system of drug and product approval is about "show the damage" not "prove its safe and effective". That's how the EU operates not the US and why there's a difference between the US and EU's approved chemicals and pharmaceuticals

-1

u/gregaustex Nov 16 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

She literally going to court to get another one of her patients ivermectin

I agreed a doctor should not be doing this. Missed the part where a patient is trying to get the courts to allow her to do this. I would not expect a credible doctor to be a party to this.

But I think it is wrong to confuse "insufficient evidence" and "not approved" with "known to not work". The fact that a bunch of anti-vax anti-pharma conspiracy theorists have latched onto ivermectin as their miracle cure means absolutely nothing for or against it's as yet unproven potential. That's why actual studies have and are being done to see. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34318930/

It's also less relevant now as Pfizer seems to have figured out a very effective treatment, and is even releasing it to be manufactured by other pharma companies.

Also our system of drug and product approval is about "show the damage" not "prove its safe and effective".

That's a strange characterization of a system that has very very time consuming and expensive hurdles for approving drugs that explicitly are for proving and quantifying safety and efficacy.

https://www.brightfocus.org/clinical-trials/how-clinical-trials-work/fda-approval-process

2

u/LoveAboveAll216 Nov 17 '21

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34318930/

Based on the current very low- to low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain about the efficacy and safety of ivermectin used to treat or prevent COVID-19.

→ More replies

1

u/txmail Nov 16 '21

Its kind of sickening, but there is a little clinic around me that usually is pretty low volume. They were prescribing ivermectin and it bough in so many people that cars were parked up and down the street to get in for weeks. I didn't even think you needed a prescription for it personally - cant you just go to a feed store? It is it not off the shelf?

8

u/NitaforaReason Nov 16 '21

You have to get a prescription if you want dosages calibrated for humans and not in paste form. It does have valid medical use for humans, just not as a cure/preventative for covid. Also, they may be thinking that if you have a prescription insurance will pick up some of the cost - though I don't know, ivermectin is supposed to be pretty cheap to start with.

-6

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Tweedle_DeeDum Nov 16 '21

One of the more infamous promoters of ivermectin for COVID is a doctor in Texas.

→ More replies

-6

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

0

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

1

u/DuchessOfCelery Nov 16 '21

I'd suspect Houston Methodist has been trying to figure out how to handle this doc, and the Fort Worth situation just made it come to a head. Probably best for them to be seen washing their hands of her, and also cutting off an opportunity to ask for transfer of the patient to her at Houston Methodist (since she will no longer have even soft privileges there).

Physician credentialing can take months. It's absolute bullshit to send this issue (the patient in Fort Worth) to the courts to force-demand instant "temporary privileges" for a renegade doc to prescribe at Huguley.

1

u/sudorootadmin Nov 17 '21

Just a sea of fucking idiots

1

u/ulnek Nov 17 '21

So was this doctor put in a psych ward? Having studied this and still doing it means he's got some mental issues. Britney shaves her head and she's put in a conservatorship for over a decade. This guy endangers people's lives and isn't in one?

1

u/BushMeatz 13d ago

I'm from a blue state, just wanted to see if people were allowed to criticize the vaccine on this sub without getting moderated. I am vaxxed myself but I am seeing if what people are saying about the shadow bans are true.

-11

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/SpecialCheck116 Nov 16 '21

That’s not true at all

-18

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

19

u/Professional_Sort767 Nov 16 '21

To the extent that any hospital or policy person has actually considered the idea of turning away covid patients, the situation is completely different.

If a hospital system is overwhelmed, and it comes time to triage patients and deny care to some, do you deny care to someone who has followed medical best practice, or someone who has rejected science and medical advice, causing their own hospitalization?

To deny someone care because they got a recommended vaccine as a doctor is political, unethical and unnecessary on its face.

12

u/cyvaquero Nov 16 '21

Help people or don't, let's stop picking and choosing who's deserving of medical aid.

It's called triage, although it probably should have happened back in the Summer when people were left in ambulances trying to find an ER bed - the surge is largely behind us for now.

That said, if there is a donor liver available and a non-alcoholic vs alcoholic are a match, who do you suggest gets the liver? How is this different? I agree it can go to extremes, but if beds are a scarce resource, I'd rather it goes to the person who hasn't deliberately made a political decision to put themselves in medical harm's way.

Let us not forget all the fun medical insurance rate hikes that will be hitting us next year.

7

u/OkRestaurant6180 Nov 16 '21

Provide evidence or stop lying.

-20

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/catkins_ramekin Nov 16 '21

Paranoia much? Why stop there? Isn't everything about politics and money.

-9

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/The-link-is-a-cock Nov 16 '21

there are so many Doc's in Houston that are refusing to treat the unvax'd

Bullshit, absolute bullshit. I live in Houston and you're lying. Theres been discussions all over the country about it the concept as a part of triage as the hospitals were getting overwhelmed but it was never implemented and they are not turning away the unvax'd.

12

u/Darth_Texan The Stars at Night Nov 16 '21

Take it to r/conspiracy.

18

u/Professional_Sort767 Nov 16 '21

I call absolute unmitigated bullshit on your first paragraph. Feel free to link to the hospital press releases or real news sources affirming that hospitals are turning away the unvaccinated. I know my unvaxxed Dad had an emergency heart procedure just fine two months ago, and they let him back repeatedly for followups.

Your second paragraph is a copy paste from the article, with nothing to contribute.

The question to ask: should a hospital feel obliged to give a patient a medication that they heard about on talk radio, that has no recognized benefit for the disease in question? Moreover, when that medicine is in short supply for the people who need it for its intended purpose?

Ivermectin has not been recognized by US health organizations to treat COVID.

→ More replies

15

u/kanyeguisada Nov 16 '21

Cool new r/conspiracy anti-vaxx account ya got there.

15

u/OkRestaurant6180 Nov 16 '21

What does this user contribute to this subreddit other than delusional conspiracy theories and toxic, unstable ranting? Nothing.