If judge’s Ivermectin order upheld, medical professionals fear ‘dangerous consequences and precedent’

Published: Oct. 5, 2021 at 10:26 PM CDT|Updated: Oct. 6, 2021 at 10:24 AM CDT
Email This Link
Share on Pinterest
Share on LinkedIn

NEW ORLEANS (WVUE) -Medicine evolves and changes over the years, and infectious disease specialist, Brobson Lutz, M.D. says there’s a reason why medical professionals study and have this prescription power.

Case in point: Hadacol.

“People loved it, I mean 12% alcohol it’s bound to do something… Hadacol and Ivermectin, as far as Covid is concerned, are in the same category; useless,” said Lutz.

Lutz re-enforces what other medical professionals have said; that ivermectin is not a safe nor effective treatment for Covid-19.

“There’s no decent medical trial and there’s no study that has shown ivermectin has any advantage whatsoever,” said Lutz.

He fears if a judge does not throw out an order that says the St. Tammany Parish Hospital must administer ivermectin to a dying patient, it will undermine medical professionals’ ability to treat patients.

“For a judge to stick his neck in a case and say, ‘hey, give this horse worming medicine to a patient because the family wants it,’... it just doesn’t ring right to me. It’s time to stop horsing around with horse medicine,” said Lutz.

Court documents show the patient, 64-year-old Charlette Ratley, died from Covid in August before the hospital had time to respond or administer the drug.

The family petitioned for Ratley’s daughter, a PA, or physician’s assistant, to administer the drug.

The hospital system in documents says Ratley’s daughter did not have clinical privileges at the hospital.

An attorney for the family says she had a prescription for ivermectin, but the hospital responds in a petition saying they could not “verify the prescription” written by a pediatric specialist or “verify the prescribed dosage.”

Attorneys for the hospital continue arguing that the order “could be extended to clinical conditions other than Covid-19 resulting in far-reaching unintended dangerous consequences and precedent.”

“This is a medical-legal question. Judges with black robes are not doctors with white coats. The hospital said the doctors have to make the medical decisions and we can’t be brought in front of a courtroom to decide what we can and cannot do. They’re trying to make a larger point which is laypeople can’t get judges to make doctors do certain things that doctors don’t want to do,” said attorney Joe Raspanti.

“I think judges need to stick to the law and physicians make the decisions concerning the treatment of their patients,” said Lutz.

In a statement, the attorney for the patient, Rene Frederick says, “Lawyers across the country before me successfully and timely litigated this issue in other states and saved lives through court intervention ordering ivermectin in the face of strong medical opposition. How can the hospital see saving lives as a bad precedent during a pandemic? Doctors across the U.S. and world are using ivermectin to save Covid patients.”

The hospital says they cannot comment given pending litigation.

The judge’s office that ruled on the order has not yet returned my request for comment.

See a spelling or grammar error in our story? Click Here to report it. Please include the headline.

Copyright 2021 WVUE. All rights reserved.