HHS: Pharmacists can’t deny patients legally prescribed abortion drugs

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I wasn't aware pharmacies were refusing to fill that

This is why people are getting ivermectin from other sources

As a Physician we prescribe meds all the time for off label uses. And they are filled.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
Then every medicine a doctor prescribes off label should also be questioned by the pharmacy for non efficacy as well right?

And there is strong financial incentive in the US to say ivermectin doesn't work. Why COVID-19 is not so spread in Africa: How does Ivermectin affect it?
I mean. That sorta is our job. I don’t work retail, but in my hospital you order things with no evidence to support its use, it is going to be questioned. Pharmacists aren’t just robots that dispense what ever the piece of paper says.

Post an article that has actually been peer reviewed and I will waste my time reading it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Pharmacists have a moral and ethical responsibility to turn away ivermectin orders for covid
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I mean. That sorta is our job. I don’t work retail, but in my hospital you order things with no evidence to support its use, it is going to be questioned. Pharmacists aren’t just robots that dispense what ever the piece of paper says.

Post an article that has actually been peer reviewed and I will waste my time reading it.
You know in America we aren't going to get that. Pfizer and monderna have given a lot of lobby money.
 
I mean. That sorta is our job. I don’t work retail, but in my hospital you order things with no evidence to support its use, it is going to be questioned. Pharmacists aren’t just robots that dispense what ever the piece of paper says.

Post an article that has actually been peer reviewed and I will waste my time reading it.
Yes but now hhs is forcing you to give birth control
 
And that is why people get it from other sources. And you can argue that as well for birth control.
assuming you are physican you should be smart enough to understand the complete false equivalency of this.
on one hand you are taking about pharmacists and health systems not allowing the use of an unproven (actually disproven) therapy based on mountains of literature vs denying a proven therapy based on your own religious beliefs and forcing them to find another pharmacy. If you are in a city, with a place on every block that is one thing, but if you live in rural america -where you are more likely to run into one of these religious zelots (we can't say christian taliban anymore) or you have one of many insurance plans that severely limits your choice - you can seriously hinder access to legit healthcare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
You know in America we aren't going to get that. Pfizer and monderna have given a lot of lobby money.
Do you serve as a peer reviewer or have you been published in a peer reviewed journal? (I can answer yes to both) - if so, then you understand that lobbies don't dictate what can be published - if you have a study worth an once of interest done correctly, you can find a peer-reviewed journal to publish it- there are literally 100's available (obviously the impact factor is varied drastically) - so - I will ask you again. Do you have one peer-reviewed article that you can use to support your claim?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Problem is, the people who want to stop abortion also don't wanna pay more taxes for a welfare state.

This. As a pro-life person who no longer calls myself pro-life because I don't want to be associated with the whackadoodle hypocritical pro-lifers, you have hit the nail on the head. The best way to stop abortions is to create a society where women feel safe, empowered, and supported to have children. Supposed pro-lifers routinely oppose all measures to do this.

How do you counsel patients getting abortive drugs?

I assume the patient is quite aware of why they are getting the drug. I counsel solely on side effects (like cramping) and do not talk about the indication for the drug at all. I suppose if the drug were prescribed by, say a neurologist, and not an OB/GYN, then I might gently broach the subject, but I have only seen OB/GYN's prescribe a clearly abortifacient drug (but for all I know it's being used after the fetus has died.)

Yes the point is to be responsible. Already too many benefits are given to single moms

Ridiculous, you have never tried to survive as a single mom, have you? Too many tax breaks are given to billionaires, but I bet you think the billionaires have earned those tax breaks.

As a Physician we prescribe meds all the time for off label uses. And they are filled.

They aren't filled if they are being used in far higher than normal doses, especially if it is known its being used as a fad drug and causing shortages of the drug for people who genuinely need it for its indicated purpose.

And there is strong financial incentive in the US to say ivermectin doesn't work. Why COVID-19 is not so spread in Africa: How does Ivermectin affect it?

Covid HAS spread in Africa, the reason why hospitalizations, deaths, and serious sickness are so low, is because the average age in Africa is 20 years old. It is no surprise that such a young population would have far less problems with COVID, then a country with an older population.

Many studies have proven that ivermectin does squat for COVID.

And there is *no* financial incentive for anyone in the US to say ivermectin doesn't work. If ivermectin did work, all the generic companies that make billions of dollars each year selling ivermectin would be happy to have their lobbyists ensure that politicians supported the use of ivermectin off-label (or at least were non-committal about it.) Hospitals have lost a lot of money treating COVID patients, if there were an easy drug to keep COVID patients out of the hospital, so their would be plenty of room for "elective" surgery patients who are the hospitals bread and butter--I guarantee hospital lobbyists would also be contacting their politicians in support of ivermectin, and ER doctors would be prescribing it left and right off label.

It amazes me that anyone can get through medical school, pharmacy school, or any kind of medical training and fall for such obvious conspiracy theory lies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
And what is also lost in these discussions, is that most people in the US are nuanced about abortion, which is why they support Roe vs Wade. Unlike the politicians who want to make it a 0% or 100% situation, most Americans think it is a private matter in the first trimester, and should be outlawed or seriously restricted in the 3rd trimester. Depending how questions are worded, people who believe that abortion should be completely legal in the first trimester, but say illegal in the 2nd trimester, may be identified as pro-life, even though their position is very different from the political pro-life position of no abortions for any reason even if the woman is going to die.
So when someone says 50% of the US is "pro-life", they are counting the people who think abortion should be legal in the first trimester, but not in the 2nd, as part of their "pro-life" number.
 
It’s like an MD version of our old legend “Unchained”

It’s this niche part of the interwebz that hasn’t migrated to Reddit for why I still login. Something inside me lives for the entertainment that the quackery provides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
And that is why people get it from other sources. And you can argue that as well for birth control.
pretty sure this guy is just a troll - I mean, he blocks his profile so you cant see what other forums he posts on- been called out here many times and now wont respond when it is obvious he can't make an intelligent comeback
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
so first real world example. i am in a state with an abortion ban. I received a prescription for misoprostol, indication “incomplete abortion.” My understanding is that the medical term for miscarriage is spontaneous abortion. I take incomplete abortion to mean an abortion that was attempted either at home or in another state. From a legal standpoint what is everyones take on this???
 
so first real world example. i am in a state with an abortion ban. I received a prescription for misoprostol, indication “incomplete abortion.” My understanding is that the medical term for miscarriage is spontaneous abortion. I take incomplete abortion to mean an abortion that was attempted either at home or in another state. From a legal standpoint what is everyones take on this???
Your understanding is wrong.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Your understanding is wrong.

i see now that incomplete abortion falls under the umbrella of spontaneous abortion. this is why i asked. we arent OB’s and it will be important for us to understand the terminology. although i do wonder if someone attempted an abortion at home and failed to complete abortion if it would still be labeled as an incomplete abortion. or maybe failed abortion? idk
 
Last edited:
i see now that incomplete abortion falls under the umbrella of spontaneous abortion. this is why i asked. we arent OB’s and it will be important for us to understand the terminology. although i do wonder if someone attempted an abortion at home and failed to complete abortion if it would still be labeled as an incomplete abortion. or maybe failed abortion? idk
Interesting question. I think it would depend on how the patient went about it - meaning if they tried something with a decent success rate versus not. Coat hanger? Failed. Herbal tea they bought from the local hippie store? Incomplete.
 
Meanwhile we have cashiers at Walgreens refusing to sell condoms based on "religious views." It's pathetic.
 
This. As a pro-life person who no longer calls myself pro-life because I don't want to be associated with the whackadoodle hypocritical pro-lifers, you have hit the nail on the head. The best way to stop abortions is to create a society where women feel safe, empowered, and supported to have children. Supposed pro-lifers routinely oppose all measures to do this.



I assume the patient is quite aware of why they are getting the drug. I counsel solely on side effects (like cramping) and do not talk about the indication for the drug at all. I suppose if the drug were prescribed by, say a neurologist, and not an OB/GYN, then I might gently broach the subject, but I have only seen OB/GYN's prescribe a clearly abortifacient drug (but for all I know it's being used after the fetus has died.)



Ridiculous, you have never tried to survive as a single mom, have you? Too many tax breaks are given to billionaires, but I bet you think the billionaires have earned those tax breaks.



They aren't filled if they are being used in far higher than normal doses, especially if it is known its being used as a fad drug and causing shortages of the drug for people who genuinely need it for its indicated purpose.



Covid HAS spread in Africa, the reason why hospitalizations, deaths, and serious sickness are so low, is because the average age in Africa is 20 years old. It is no surprise that such a young population would have far less problems with COVID, then a country with an older population.

Many studies have proven that ivermectin does squat for COVID.

And there is *no* financial incentive for anyone in the US to say ivermectin doesn't work. If ivermectin did work, all the generic companies that make billions of dollars each year selling ivermectin would be happy to have their lobbyists ensure that politicians supported the use of ivermectin off-label (or at least were non-committal about it.) Hospitals have lost a lot of money treating COVID patients, if there were an easy drug to keep COVID patients out of the hospital, so their would be plenty of room for "elective" surgery patients who are the hospitals bread and butter--I guarantee hospital lobbyists would also be contacting their politicians in support of ivermectin, and ER doctors would be prescribing it left and right off label.

It amazes me that anyone can get through medical school, pharmacy school, or any kind of medical training and fall for such obvious conspiracy theory lies.
Billionaires contribute to society. And they pay a lot of taxes. But they don't pay the one hundred percent tax everyone wants from them.

Elon Musk says he will pay over $11 billion in taxes this year​

PUBLISHED MON, DEC 20 2021 4:41 AM ESTUPDATED MON, DEC 20 2021 1:58 PM EST

Ryan Browne
@RYAN_BROWNE_
 
And single mothers do get a lot of support from our taxes. Many I know purposely don't get married so they can get these breaks.
 
And single mothers do get a lot of support from our taxes. Many I know purposely don't get married so they can get these breaks.
Who tells people stuff like this? And how does Mentos have classmates who told him they live in luxury apartments instead of paying off their student loans?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Who tells people stuff like this? And how does Mentos have classmates who told him they live in luxury apartments instead of paying off their student loans?
I have employees. I see the difference between the women that are hired that are married, single, and single with kids.
 
I have employees. I see the difference between the women that are hired that are married, single, and single with kids.
Like financially you mean? If so, how?
 
Kill Count Boot Licker GIF by Dead Meat James
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
That's their beliefs. Many catholic hospitals won't do abortions.
I don't need the goddamned cashier at Walgreens making moral judgments on my purchases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I already wrote it out up further. Snap benefits, paid medical benefits thru Medicaid for them and the kid, section 8 housing, free daycare..
Do you want these? I can't tell if you are implying these people are living the life while you are a prisoner to your employer and bills
 
i see now that incomplete abortion falls under the umbrella of spontaneous abortion. this is why i asked. we arent OB’s and it will be important for us to understand the terminology. although i do wonder if someone attempted an abortion at home and failed to complete abortion if it would still be labeled as an incomplete abortion. or maybe failed abortion? idk
I will be honest, until I started working in the ED - I didn't know this terminology as well -

Another one - is "missed abortion" and "threatened abortion"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Do you serve as a peer reviewer or have you been published in a peer reviewed journal? (I can answer yes to both) - if so, then you understand that lobbies don't dictate what can be published - if you have a study worth an once of interest done correctly, you can find a peer-reviewed journal to publish it- there are literally 100's available (obviously the impact factor is varied drastically) - so - I will ask you again. Do you have one peer-reviewed article that you can use to support your claim?
@Heist

no response? oh- wait - because you don't have actual academic evidence
 
Do you want these? I can't tell if you are implying these people are living the life while you are a prisoner to your employer and bills
guessing he has incel syndrome
 
I have employees. I see the difference between the women that are hired that are married, single, and single with kids.
Are your telling us the unmarried women with kids have a higher standard of living than those who are married? I seriously doubt there is any data to support that claim. Unmarried parents are the single best predictor that a child will grow up in poverty.
guessing he has incel syndrome
From what he wrote, I figured he had proposed to multiple women who all declined because they were living the high life on the government welfare dollar….or at least that’s what they told him.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
Are your telling us the unmarried women with kids have a higher standard of living than those who are married? I seriously doubt there is any data to support that claim. Unmarried parents are the

From what he wrote, I figured he had proposed to multiple women who all declined because they were living the high life on the government welfare dollar….or at least that’s what they told him.
He will probably quote something from americas frontline doctors. Or oz.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
Are your telling us the unmarried women with kids have a higher standard of living than those who are married? I seriously doubt there is any data to support that claim. Unmarried parents are the single best predictor that a child will grow up in poverty.

From what he wrote, I figured he had proposed to multiple women who all declined because they were living the high life on the government welfare dollar….or at least that’s what they told him.
If the kids' father is unemployed, yes the standard of living would be better generally speaking. But that's about the only time.
 
And single mothers do get a lot of support from our taxes. Many I know purposely don't get married so they can get these breaks.

Yeah, maybe this was the case back in the 80's.

40 years later, in my state, and I would guess many other states, *all* income from anyone living in the house is counted in whether *any* member of that house can get financial aid. So, if a woman is living with her boyfriend, his income is counted regardless of whether or not they are married. If working children (whether 18 or not) are living in the household, their income is also counted. If a "roommate" is living in the house, then to count as a roommate, the roommate must be contributing towards household expenses, and the amount they contributed is counted as income. Now, if you are talking about a case where someone is purposely paying for a different resident from their boyfriend, so they wouldn't have to count their boyfriend's income....the costs of 2 separate residences is going to outweigh any aid they get from the government.

I already wrote it out up further. Snap benefits, paid medical benefits thru Medicaid for them and the kid, section 8 housing, free daycare..

These are all completely different forms of aid, and someone who qualifies for one, often doesn't qualify for any of the others.
Medicaid--insurance is insanely expensive, so this is the one form of aid that working people are most likely to qualify for. Many times people who are on "medicaid", are just on medicaid as a subsidiary to their primary insurance. Depending on the state, the state may pay a portion of the premium for their insurance through their job. Most (maybe even all) states require people who can get insurance through their job to do so, in order to get a Medicaid as a subsidiary. Many states have CHIPS, which while the person is insured through Medicaid, they are paying higher premiums/deductibles based on their income, then a regular person covered through Medicaid would.
Daycare....daycare is also insanely expensive. It makes sense for states to pay for this, as if they didn't, then the individual would have to stay home with their children and have *no* income coming in. Most people qualifying for daycare subsidies, are getting just that, a subsidy to help them pay for daycare, not "free" daycare.
Section 8 housing......far, far harder to qualify for then either Medicaid or Daycare. Even when people qualify for it, finding someplace to live that will take their Section 8 voucher can be harder than actually qualifying for it. Many people who manage to qualify for Section 8 housing, don't actually use it, because nobody is required to accept Section 8, and many/most landlords don't.

Edited to fix typos

SNAP benefits......again, these are pretty hard to qualify for. WIC is far easier to qualify for. WIC benefits are sometimes over the top, but this is more government subsidy to farmers, than to the people collecting on WIC. SNAP is pretty limited, I'd challenge you to feed your family on a SNAP benefit. (I'm grateful I've never had to, seeing what some people live on with SNAP, I don't know how they do it.)

I stand by my statement, I think you are completely wrong about what government aid actually is given to people and how hard it is to qualify and live on that aid.
 
Billionaires contribute to society. And they pay a lot of taxes. But they don't pay the one hundred percent tax everyone wants from them.

Elon Musk says he will pay over $11 billion in taxes this year​

PUBLISHED MON, DEC 20 2021 4:41 AM ESTUPDATED MON, DEC 20 2021 1:58 PM EST

Ryan Browne
@RYAN_BROWNE_

Much of this $11 billion is from Elon Musk's stock options.....from which he made far, far, far, far more. Stock option income is taxed heavier than regular income. Even so, Elon Musk's effective tax rate is only 3.27%. I paid more than 3.27% in taxes, in every single year since I've been paying taxes. Have you? Nobody is asking for Elon Musk to pay "one hundred percent tax", we are asking him to pay *at least* the same average tax rate, that the average working person pays.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Yeah, maybe this was the case back in the 80's.

40 years later, in my state, and I would guess many other states, *all* income from anyone living in the house is counted in whether *any* member of that house can get financial aid. So, if a woman is living with her boyfriend, his income is counted regardless of whether or not they are married. If working children (whether 18 or not) are living in the household, their income is also counted. If a "roommate" is living in the house, then to count as a roommate, the roommate must be contributing towards household expenses, and the amount they contributed is counted as income. Now, if you are talking about a case where someone is purposely paying for a different resident from their boyfriend, so they wouldn't have to count their boyfriend's income....the costs of 2 separate residences is going to outweigh any aid they get from the government.



These are all completely different forms of aid, and someone who qualifies for one, often doesn't qualify for any of the others.
Medicaid--insurance is insanely expensive, so this is the one form of aid that working people are most likely to qualify for. Many times people who are on "medicaid", are just on medicaid as a subsidiary to their primary insurance. Depending on the state, the state may pay a portion of the premium for their insurance through their job. Most (maybe even all) states require people who can get insurance through their job to do so, in order to get a Medicaid as a subsidiary. Many states have CHIPS, which while the person is insured through Medicaid, they are paying higher premiums/deductibles based on their income, then a regular person covered through Medicaid would.
Daycare....daycare is also insanely expensive. It makes sense for states to pay for this, as if they didn't, then the individual would have to stay home with their children and have *no* income coming in. Most people qualifying for daycare subsidies, are getting just that, a subsidy to help them pay for daycare, not "free" daycare.
Section 8 housing......far, far harder to qualify for then either Medicaid or Daycare. Even when people qualify for it, finding someplace to live that will take their Section 8 voucher can be harder than actually qualifying for it. Many people who manage to qualify for Section 8 housing, don't actually use it, because nobody is required to accept Section 8, and many/most landlords don't.

Edited to fix typos

SNAP benefits......again, these are pretty hard to qualify for. WIC is far easier to qualify for. WIC benefits are sometimes over the top, but this is more government subsidy to farmers, than to the people collecting on WIC. SNAP is pretty limited, I'd challenge you to feed your family on a SNAP benefit. (I'm grateful I've never had to, seeing what some people live on with SNAP, I don't know how they do it.)

I stand by my statement, I think you are completely wrong about what government aid actually is given to people and how hard it is to qualify and live on that aid.
seems like the boyfriend who works could simply list his friends or parents house as his address, giving the appearance the unemployed single mom is living alone, thus qualifying her and her children for all if these benefits. or am i missing something
 
...or am i missing something
Yeah the bigger picture. If anyone seriously thinks getting aid means you live a life of luxury, you really need to switch over and see how :lavish" this lifestyle is. Especially since, according to this website, customer service workers are driving luxury cars making 6 figures
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Much of this $11 billion is from Elon Musk's stock options.....from which he made far, far, far, far more. Stock option income is taxed heavier than regular income. Even so, Elon Musk's effective tax rate is only 3.27%. I paid more than 3.27% in taxes, in every single year since I've been paying taxes. Have you? Nobody is asking for Elon Musk to pay "one hundred percent tax", we are asking him to pay *at least* the same average tax rate, that the average working person pays.

I'm fine with what he's paying now. He's created a lot of jobs in America.
 
Oh man. I will never understand the “create jobs” argument. Demand for the product creates the jobs. Musk will do whatever he can to eliminate as many jobs as he can to reduce payroll. He isn’t creating jobs voluntarily. He is benefiting from his workers. It’s a mostly one-sided relationship where Musk is the primary beneficiary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Oh man. I will never understand the “create jobs” argument. Demand for the product creates the jobs. Musk will do whatever he can to eliminate as many jobs as he can to reduce payroll. He isn’t creating jobs voluntarily. He is benefiting from his workers. It’s a mostly one-sided relationship where Musk is the primary beneficiary.
Don't forget he'd have no incentive to create any jobs if he only took home hundred billion instead of a hundred and fifteen billion. He'd be like: I can't live under these conditions. I need to find a 9 to 5 job so I can feed my 14 children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top