Physicians Rights: Off Label Prescriptions of Ivermectin for Covid-19

Physicians Rights: Off Label Prescriptions of Ivermectin for Covid-19

Off Label Prescription
Physicians Rights: Off Label Prescriptions of Ivermectin for Covid-19. Doctors have the right to prescribe medication for conditions other than the one approved.

Even in the year 2021 the more things change, the more they stay the same. This is reference  to the off-label prescription options doctors have always had that are still controversial when it comes to the ongoing global Covid 19 pandemic. Off-label prescribing is when a physician gives a drug that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved to treat a condition different than the one you’ve got. This practice is legal and even common. In fact, one in five prescriptions written today are for off-label use.

Same But Different

Last year Dr. Goldstein discussed the controversy and government interference with how hydroxychloroquine, a common treatment for Malaria was prescribed off-label for patients suffering with Covid-19. Fast forward from September 2020 to October 2021 and the same thing is happening with a drug called Ivermectin, a drug that is approved for treatment of certain parasitic worm infestations, and its possible use as a treatment for Covid-19.

 What is going on with this latest controversy?

Unfortunately, the controversy involves politics. The government under both Republican and Democratic administrations has tried to dictate what treatment should be used to treat Covid infections. In truth, the development of treatments should not be political and should be left to the medical profession. Government should limit itself to funding research and to providing additional equipment and hospital beds as needed. The CDC can be a clearinghouse to provide  data to physicians and researchers about the pandemic. A classic comment sticks in my craw. During the Vice Presidential debate, Kamala Harris famously said if Donald Trump said to take the vaccine she would not. But if Joe Biden said to take it she would. Think about it. What does either man know about Kamala Harris to advise whether or not she should take the vaccine?

She should make the decision with the advice of her physician. The government does have a public health role to protect the public from getting infected but not a treatment role. 

Is Ivermectin OK to Use?

There are studies that show Ivermectin has no anti-viral benefit, some that show it has those qualities for some diseases and others that show it is a miraculous treatment. So far there is no consensus among physicians about the utility of ivermectin. “My view is that doctors who suspect it to be of value should be allowed to study it,” Dr. Goldstein said.  There are many examples from the history of medicine where an individual physician working alone has made a major breakthrough. Two examples come to mind: Dr. Simelweis saved the lives of numerous mothers by suggesting that OB doctors should wash their hands before delivering the baby. He was ridiculed by the medical establishment at the time as the germ theory of infections was not yet discovered. More recently 2 Australian doctors, Barry J. Marshall and Robin Warren found that stomach ulcers were caused by a bacteria. “They also were ridiculed by the medical establishment until they won the Nobel prize,” Dr. Goldstein told his listeners. “Allow physicians to pursue different treatments for Covid. Stop politicizing the treatments and stop publishing premature articles in the press for or against any unproven treatment.”

With more much-needed insight is respected neurologist and founder of the Houston Healthcare Initiative, Dr. Steven Goldstein on his regular podcast.

Click the link to listen:

3 Goals: Healthcare Changes to the American Families Plan Could Create Affordable Healthcare

Blood Plasma Covid Treatment and Pharmaceutical Industry Reform

Blood plasma covid treatment and pharmaceutical industry reform. On August 23, 2020 the Food and Drug Administration’s announced a decision to grant blood plasma treatment for Coronavirus/Covid-19 patients with a  fast-track authorization for its emergency use as a treatment for hospitalized COVID patients. This “emergency use authorization” triggered an outcry from scientists and doctors, who said the decision was not supported by adequate clinical evidence and criticized the FDA for what was perceived as bowing to political pressure.

Should Pharma choose people over profit?
Big Pharma has a big influence on the congress from multi-million dollar lobbying effort.

News coverage about this potential treatment has done little to clarify whether its useful or not. The idea that there could be a motivation behind the fast track authorization for this potential treatment other than looking for a useful therapeutic is troubling. More to the point, who should decide what patients receive in treatment for their illnesses? To help us make sense of how reforms for the pharmaceutical industry could potentially help separate facts from spin and who we should all listen to is respected neurologist, Dr. Steven Goldstein. Click below to listen.

To read more about this issue please click below:

The Reforms Big Pharmaceutical Companies Need

Reforms for the pharmaceutical industry.
Dr. Steven Goldstein has ideas that will make the pharmaceutical industry more responsive to the American public.

The Reforms Big Pharmaceutical Companies Need. On his regular podcast, Dr. Steven Goldstein advocated dramatic reforms for the pharmaceutical industry and with good reason. To hear the podcast go to: SoundCloud, iHeartRadio, Stitcher, Backtracks, LibSyn, or the website at Dr. Goldstein insists that for the health and welfare of the American public, the congress must pass reforms that limit the influence of the pharmaceutical industry and its lobby.

What Has To Change – Ban Pharmaceutical Lobbying

“Corporate lobbying by pharmaceutical companies should be illegal,” Dr. Goldstein told his audience. “It isn’t right.” The companies who make more expensive treatments for ailments that could be treated with generic medicines spend millions of dollars lobbying the congress. According to a study by Brigham Young University, the health sector lobby’s spending increased more than 10% in the first quarter of 2020 while the non-health lobby sector increased 1%. Meanwhile, the number of new lobbyists registered in the health sector increased a staggering 140% while non-health sector registrations increased 63%.

Patent Reform

Drug companies should not be permitted to obtain patents because of small modifications to already existing patented medication. “That is not what the spirit of patent protection was meant for,” Dr. Goldstein said. He also advocates that existing antitrust laws be enforced to stop price fixing. “An example is the predatory practice of larger drug companies paying off small generic manufacturers in order to eliminate competition,” Dr. Goldstein said.

Prescription Reform; Physicians Prescribe Not Pharmacists or Bureaucrats

Physicians should be free to prescribe drugs “off-label” without fear of lawsuit or sanctions from state or federal regulatory boards. “Full stop, no questions from non-physicians, pharmacists or government regulators,” Dr. Goldstein stated.

FDA Reform

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is charged with making sure drugs are “safe and effective”. “If you think about it, there is no such thing as a drug that is 100% safe or 100% effective,” Dr. Goldstein said. “Even aspirin can cause gastritis and intestinal bleeding that in rare instances can cause death. Drugs used to treat epilepsy are only about 50% effective.  How then does the FDA decide what drugs to approve? After randomized controlled trials are performed, a panel of “experts” decides which drugs to approve.”

About Houston Healthcare Initiative and Dr. Steven Goldstein

Dr. Steven Goldstein is a Houston based neurologist. He founded the Houston Healthcare Initiative and is an advocate for common sense solutions to the healthcare crisis that confronts the citizens and residents of the United States of America. The Reforms Big Pharmaceutical Companies Need.



The Source of the Misunderstanding: Retracted Article Mischaracterizes Hydroxychloroquine

Likeun ringingabell.

Retracted Article Mischaracterizes Hydroxychloroquine. No one can un-ring a bell. No article can be ‘un-read’ or any eventual retraction definitely seen and understood. There are few more illustrative examples lately than when respected medical journals published information about the use of Hydroxychloroquine as a possible treatment for the Coronavirus/Covid-19 virus they later retracted.

Large French Real World Observational Study Reveals Hydroxychloroquine Azithromycin-Associated with Reduction in Hospitalization-Death for COVID 19 Patients.

On his podcast, respected, Houston based neurologist Dr. Steven Goldstein describes how the well-established, inexpensive drug Hydroxychloroquine was mischaracterized. To listen to the podcast please visit: SoundCloud, Libsyn,iHeart, and the Houston Healthcare Initiative web site.

Article Retracted But Damage Done

Early in the pandemic, Hydroxychloroquine looked like it could be a possible treatment for Coronavirus/Covid-19 ,but use of and studies about the drug quickly lost favor after articles in the Lancet and New England Journal of Medicinecast doubt. The later retracted study and reporting about it had an immediate impact. The World Health Organization (WHO) stopped their research into hydroxychloroquine. Multiple news web sites carried the message that Hydroxychloroquine was not effective, citing the New England Journal of Medicine as its source. One example was from the NBC News web site read, “Hydroxychloroquine fails to prevent COVID-19, large study finds.”

Damage Done

While the articles were retracted the information originally published, could not be ‘unseen.’ “The news media touted these articles, that falsely claimed there was no evidence that treatment with Hydroxychloroquine was effective,” Dr. Goldstein told his listeners.  “A French study published March 20, 2020 suggested the drug helped people with coronavirus, reporting it “is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in patients with COVID-19.”

The article and its author, French physician and scientist, Dr. Didier Raoult, who authored papers showing favorable results, were personally and professionally attacked (The New York Times) among others. Suffice to say that way more people saw and continue to see these refuted articles, even though they were retracted. But the harm from them remains.

About The Houston Healthcare Initiative

Houston Healthcare Initiative is a group of physicians and health conscious patients that have joined together in a Healthcare cooperative to maintain and improve the physical and mental health of each member of the group. Visit online at

Sources and Links

“Retraction: Cardiovascular Disease, Drug Therapy, and Mortality in Covid-19.” N Engl J Med. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007621.

June 25, 2020 N Engl J Med 2020; 382:2582. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2021225

“Retraction—Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis.” Published: June 05, 2020.

By: Mandeep R Mehra,   Frank RuschitzkaAmit N Patel.

“Two elite medical journals retract coronavirus papers over data integrity questions”

By: Charles PillerKelly Servick Jun. 4, 2020 , 5:30 PM

“He Was a Science Star. Then He Promoted a Questionable Cure for Covid-19.” The New York Times By Scott Sayare. Published May 12, 2020 Updated May 21, 2020

“French Doctor Leads Charge for Treating Coronavirus With Antimalarial Drug”

Health authorities say evidence is inconclusive that the treatment, which President Trump has backed, is effective. By Nick Kostov and David Gauthier-Villars

Updated April 11, 2020 7:52 pm ET

Retracted Article Mischaracterizes Hydroxychloroquine.

Retracted Article Mischaracterizes Hydroxychloroquine.

A Retracted Article Drove Misunderstanding of Hydroxychloroquine

A Retracted Article Drove Misunderstanding Hydroxychloroquine

A Retracted Article Drove Misunderstanding of Hydroxychloroquine. No one can unring a bell. When articles published in the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine published and then retracted an article critical about the possible use of hydroxychloriquine as a treatment for Coronavirus/Covid-19 they may have shown good faith with the retractions but the damage was done. On his regular podcast, Dr. Steven Goldstein discusses how and why the use of an inexpensive drug was widely criticized. An article from Tablet magazine (Hydroxychloroquine: A Morality Tale) describes the issue in detail.

The criticisms were based on the retracted articles, but there was more to it. Political agendas and money both added to the manufactured confusion about a drug that was used to treat malaria, lupus and others without controversy. Dr. Goldstein believes that reforms for government and the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry were never more obvious than in this example. A Retracted Article Drove Misunderstanding of Hydroxychloroquine.