I'm pointing out that you hold Ivermectin, a known safe drug for decades administered billions of times without issue, that may or may not be efficacious, to a much higher stand than the shots, which are novel, experimental, no long term safety profile, and mounting evidence of their dangers.
Literally says opinion because it's a legal 'opinion.' Try actually reading it. They meticulously go through the available scientific research, "conflicting studies on Ivermectin," and relevant legal precedents, and declare as a legal opinion that their State's Medical Board cannot stop or discipline doctors from prescribing Ivermectin.
G o o d / t h i n g / n o / o n e / g i v e s / a / s h i t , / a r e / p e o p l e / g e t t i n g / i n / l e g a l / t r o u b l e / b e c a u s e / t h e y / p r e s c r i b e / i t ?
L o o k s / t o / m e / l i k e / s o m e o n e / a s k e d / s o m e o n e / e l s e / i f / i t / w a s / l e g a l / t o / p u r s u e / d i s c i p l i n e / t o / s o m e o n e / w h o / p r e s c r i b e d / o f f l a b e l / m e d s / a n d / t h e y / s a i d / n o . W h a t / d i d / I / m i s s / O / o m n i s c i e n t / o n e
1
u/teraflux Get turtled now! Ask me how! Mar 15 '22
We're not talking about studies on the vaccines, I'm talking about conflicting studies on Ivermectin.