Can the President demand pharmaceutical companies mass produce the hydroxychloroquine and then have the FDA temporarily downgrade it to an over-the-counter drug? Then everyone can take it as a prophylactic to prevent getting the virus, or at least GREATLY reduce the severity if you do get it?
Comments (21)
sorted by:
Yes, the bigger problem however, is only if that company does it in the US
They used to be given special tax breaks to manufacture in Puerto Rico. Obama ended those shortly after taking office so they all went to China.
Can you imagine getting anything made/done in Puerto Rico?
It works as long as the pharmaceutical companies are in charge and not the PR government.
Where would you keep it?
All the warehouses are still full of the hurricane relieve supplies...
Thanks, 0bama.
Mylan has started production and says it will have product by mid-april from it's west virignia plant and thinks it can ramp up to 50million tablets.
Obama did so many illegal things using his "executive orders" (see DACA), so who's gonna stop Trump from commandeering a few company's that makes capsules of prostate powder or fish oil (or something like that), and require them to start making the hydroxychloroquine in bulk. If he can't get the FDA to temporarily downgrade the drug to OTC (over-the-counter) status, then have a bunch of military doctors go online and start issuing prescriptions. Then get the prescriptions filled by the company's that Trump commandeered. Right now, people can go online and get an RX for an ED drug from some doctor on the web, and that drug has many more potential problems for overuse than hydroxychloroquine. Of course the dems will scream - screw 'em. This type of action is exactly why we elected Donald Trump. He has a big set of brass ones and could care less what the libs think. GO TRUMP - DO IT TODAY!
Probably wouldn't even have to. It's cheap- much cheaper than the stimulus we just passed. Just buy a ton of it and pass it out.
Trump already orderd GM to produce ventilators. So, I'd say "yes."
Probably. But the medical establishment needs to do 5 years of trials first.
We wouldn't want people who would otherwise die today without the medication risk dying years from now with it, would we? (Statist authoritarian logic)
Why does a drug need to be trialled if it has already existed and been in use for decades? It would be reproduced in its current form therefore all testing has already been done.
I think his post was an /s.
Because we don't know yet whether it actually works.
Or whether there is another drug that works better.
Or Worse get a rash
Over the counter would be a bad idea, people would hoard it, especially Democrat governors. Make people go to the doctor or pharmacy to get it. Plus it is not okay for certain people, I believe you can't take it with a heart condition, and there are occasionally eye complications.
No need to. Four companies have already stepped up to the plate, and will have millions of pills available sometime in mid-April.
This stuff is not easy to make. There are a lot of complicated steps involved. It's not as easy as two guys going out to the desert for a coupla days to cook up a batch of meth.
Grama has been on it for a decade for arthritis. It was given to tons of vets in Viet name. Used around the world to combat malaria for decades. It's ready.
It's been out for decades, and is thus thoroughly "tested". Have a downvote.
Well, if we already have 4 company's who will make millions and millions of this stuff, all we need is for Trump to downgrade it to over-the-counter status and the rest of us can get back to work!