[Newbiesaukee]

Just to clarify certain aspects of the so-called "inside" Pfizer story.

The basic idea about this "inside" information is factually flawed.

Basically, in the U.S., physicians are able to write a prescription for any medication which has been approved for any use. I can legally write a prescription for, example, hydroxychloroquine to treat toenail fungus and the pharmacist will fill it. Actually, writing a prescription does not require a diagnosis and the pharmacist will fill it. So the emphasis on the diagnosis of "upper respiratory infection" vs. Covid makes no sense on its surface and this seems to be the key to the poster's discussion. I admit to not really understanding his point.

Now, writing a prescription for hydroxychloroquine would open me up for malpractice suits, refusal of the insurance company to pay for; and any number of penalties...but not in anyway that would resemble what the poster wrote.

Certainly, I see no distinction in writing the diagnosis of Covid vs "upper respiratory infection" in any way that makes any medical; or, for that matter, any political sense. I don't understand how this would effect Pfizer in any practical way.

It's unfortunate that this helpful thread has been hijacked.