• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentence "This action taken on yadda is hereby revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote. And here is a press release that went with it.. Notice that buried in the press release is the short paragraph,

Of note, FDA approved products may be prescribed by physicians for off-label uses if they determine it is appropriate for treating their patients, including during COVID.

• There is weasel wording here. Regardless whether the FDA recommends HCQ for treating COVID, it still has been, still is, and remains an FDA approved drug. Get it?
• By hijacking the EUA letter and press release with verbiage that means the FDA does not 'approve' of this drug being used to treat COVID .... they are misleading the quick-skimming public into believing they said 'its APPROVED status' has been revoked.
• Pleas try to wrap your head around this.
• The EUA letter contains an off-topic and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• When the FDA sees EUA fallacies and untruths in the press, they do NOTHING.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright who turned Orange Man Bad 'whistleblower' when his jig was up and is probably about to close a book deal.

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentence "This action taken on yadda is hereby revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote. And here is a press release that went with it.. Notice that buried in the press release is the short paragraph,

Of note, FDA approved products may be prescribed by physicians for off-label uses if they determine it is appropriate for treating their patients, including during COVID.

• There is weasel wording here. Regardless whether the FDA recommends HCQ for treating COVID, it still has been, still is, and remains an FDA approved drug. Get it?
• By hijacking the EUA letter and press release with verbiage that means the FDA does not 'approve' of this drug being used to treat COVID .... they are misleading the quick-skimming public into believing they said 'its APPROVED status' has been revoked.
• Pleas try to wrap your head around this.
• The EUA letter contains an off-topic and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• When the FDA sees EUA fallacies and untruths in the press, they do NOTHING.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright who turned Orange Man Bad 'whistleblower' when his jig was up and is about to close a book deal.

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentence "This action taken on yadda is hereby revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote. And here is a press release that went with it.. Notice that buried in the press release is the short paragraph,

Of note, FDA approved products may be prescribed by physicians for off-label uses if they determine it is appropriate for treating their patients, including during COVID.

• There is weasel wording here. Regardless whether the FDA recommends HCQ for treating COVID, it still has been, still is, and remains an FDA approved drug. Get it?
• By hijacking the EUA letter and press release with verbiage that means the FDA does not 'approve' of this drug being used to treat COVID .... they are misleading the quick-skimming public into believing they said 'its APPROVED status' has been revoked.
• Pleas try to wrap your head around this.
• The EUA letter contains an off-topic and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• When the FDA sees EUA fallacies and untruths in the press, they do NOTHING.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentence "This action taken on yadda is hereby revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote. And here is a press release that went with it.. Notice that buried in the press release is the short paragraph,

Of note, FDA approved products may be prescribed by physicians for off-label uses if they determine it is appropriate for treating their patients, including during COVID.

• There is weasel wording here. Regardless whether the FDA recommends HCQ for treating COVID, it still has been, still is, and remains an FDA approved drug. Get it?
• By hijacking the EUA letter and press release with verbiage that means the FDA does not 'approve' of this drug being used to treat COVID .... they are misleading the quick-skimming public into believing they said 'its APPROVED status' has been revoked.
• Pleas try to wrap your head around this.
• The EUA letter contains an off-topic and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentence "This action taken on yadda is hereby revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote. And here is a press release that went with it.. Notice that buried in the press release is the short paragraph,

Of note, FDA approved products may be prescribed by physicians for off-label uses if they determine it is appropriate for treating their patients, including during COVID.

• There is weasel wording here. Regardless whether the FDA recommends HCQ for treating COVID, it still has been, still is, and remains an FDA approved drug. Get it?
• By hijacking the EUA letter and press release with verbiage that means the FDA does not 'approve' of this drug being used to treat COVID .... they are misleading the quick-skimming public into believing they said 'its APPROVED status has been revoked.
• Pleas try to wrap your head around this.
• The EUA letter contains an off-topic and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

This insinuation makes no sense. You are telling us your idea of "why" but not the "how".

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentence "This action taken on yadda is hereby revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote. And here is a press release that went with it.. Notice that buried in the press release is the short paragraph,

Of note, FDA approved products may be prescribed by physicians for off-label uses if they determine it is appropriate for treating their patients, including during COVID.

• There is weasel wording here. Regardless whether the FDA recommends HCQ for treating COVID, it still has been, still is, and remains an FDA approved drug. Get it?
• By hijacking the EUA letter and press release with verbiage that means the FDA does not 'approve' of this drug being used to treat COVID .... they are misleading the quick-skimming public into believing they said 'its APPROVED status has been revoked.
• Pleas try to wrap your head around this.
• The EUA letter contains an off-topic and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

This insinuation makes no sense. You are telling us your idea of "why" but not the "how".

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentance "This action taken yadda is revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote.
• It contains an off-topic and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

This insinuation makes no sense. You are telling us your idea of "why" but not the "how".

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA/BARDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentance "This action taken yadda is revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote.
• It contains an off-top and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

This insinuation makes no sense. You are telling us your idea of "why" but not the "how".

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentance "This action taken yadda is revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote.
• It contains an off-top and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERAL PERMISSION TO TREAT.
• They deliberately crafted this misunderstanding, encouraged it.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

This insinuation makes no sense. You are telling us your idea of "why" but not the "how".

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentance "This action taken yadda is revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote.
• It contains an off-top and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERALPERMISSION TO TREAT.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.
• Identify the evil fucks in FDA/BARDA. misleading the public about the purpose and scope of EUA.
• End their jobs. Hint: one of them since start of epidemic was Rick Bright.

This insinuation makes no sense. You are telling us your idea of "why" but not the "how".

• There is no such thing as a EUA for "vaccine development"
• There was an EUA for a specific batch of hydroxychloroquine in the government stockpile. But it has been revoked. It ONLY related to HCQ in that specific stockpile. Listen closely to this clear answer about HCQ taken from Trump's conference on Seniors.
• Note that an Emergency Use Authorization does NOT mean permission to treat with. The existence of an EUA (or not) has never affected physicians' ability to prescribe off-label in the US.
• There are people who want you to think so. The FDA has been an active part of this misinformation campaign.
• News reporters, even doctors not familiar with exact FDA term and procedure get it wrong too. It has been a deadly misunderstanding.

So what happened back in June when it hit the news that the EUA had been revoked?

• The FDA was faced with drafting a standard EUA revocation notice that released a specific batch of HCQ in the US stockpile from restricted to hospital to general availability.
• This EUA could have been written as one sentance "This action taken yadda is revoked.""
• Instead some evil fucks who should lose their jobs decided to hijack the simple document. This is what they wrote.
• It contains an off-top and irrelevent 'recap' of FDA's general guidelines against HCQ use. It is suspicious in its appearance and intent.
• The FDA was counting on the press (and public) not to realize that EUA affects batches of drug only, NOT EXPRESSING GENERALPERMISSION TO TREAT.
• HCQ prescription off-label has NEVER been forbidden.
• I say again, everyone who had a chance to clarify this and did not needs to lose their jobs.