Conservative judges revive case on FDA’s “you are not a horse” ivermectin posts

You are still not a horse, but FDA will go to court over its authority to advise you.

See full article...

 

[Corporate_Goon]

Is the argument really that because you’re allowed to prescribe off-label, the FDA has no place commenting on such usage(s)? I’m not qualified to comment on any statute/precedent at play, but from a logical standpoint that sounds absurd to me. (That is, the law isn’t always logical, but that outcome would strike me as absurd.)

No, the argument is that the FDA doesn't have the authority to comment on how any approved drugs are used after it has completed that approval process, and doing so steps outside its statutory authority as a regulator and interferes with the authority of state medical boards and the discretion of individual doctors.

This isn't a perfect analogy, but this is akin to the distinction between the FCC as the body that assigns over-air frequencies to particular broadcasters, and the FCC as the body that determines what is appropriate to be broadcast once those frequencies are assigned. The authority of the FCC to do the former is absolute, but the authority of the FCC to do the latter is significantly limited both by its statutory authority and by the US constitution.

These doctors are scumbags grasping at straws and are going to find they have both a standing issue and a damages issue if this goes further, but the question of the limits of FDA authority is a genuine legal question here and I can't help but think a lot of the people skimming this article and jumping right to the comments section are letting their own political biases blind them to that.