What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The "I Can't Believe There's No Abortion Thread" Part Deux: Electric Boogaloo

Status
Not open for further replies.
As expected, the Texas Federal "judge" ruled against the FDA on the abortion pill.

Less expectedly, an actual federal judge in Washington state issued a conflicting order affirming the FDA less than an hour later. So we're likely headed to SCOTUS in the medium term after the respective courts of appeals weigh in.
 
As expected, the Texas Federal "judge" ruled against the FDA on the abortion pill.

Less expectedly, an actual federal judge in Washington state issued a conflicting order affirming the FDA less than an hour later. So we're likely headed to SCOTUS in the medium term after the respective courts of appeals weigh in.

I look forward to whatever mental gymnastics lead to the Court declaring that the FDA doesn't have the power to decide what food and drugs are safe to use.
 
States Rights! Roe was wrongly decided! Freedumb!

This ruling is fascinating. Here we have a conservative Judge issuing a ruling of the exact mechanism and type that the conservatives hate the most and they're all fine with it. They're all a bunch of fucking hypocrites.
 
This ruling is fascinating. Here we have a conservative Judge issuing a ruling of the exact mechanism and type that the conservatives hate the most and they're all fine with it. They're all a bunch of ****ing hypocrites.

Determine the outcome, and work backwards. Consistency in process is a bug, not a feature. Consistency in outcome is all that matters.
 
This goes WAY beyond whether or not this medication is available. If upheld it opens the door for just about any medication/vaccines/treatments to be challenged. It doesn't matter how long they have been used or how successful. Many of the meds that are old standards were used way before the current regs were instituted. While most people are freaking about this med a fair amount of us are freaking about the potential for complete chaos as wackos file cases and we get conflicting rulings. The potential for huge legal bills as things wend their way thru the system- get appealed, overturnrned, challenged, etc. If you were whining before about the cost of meds wait til you see what happens when they tack on the overhead for this.

The dark ages. [Early Middle Ages ...in Western Europe after the fall of the Western Roman Empire that characterises it as marked by economic, intellectual and cultural decline.] Always wondered how this was managed. They managed to suppress and label as evil- science, culture, medicine. They killed the herbalists, the healers and labeled them witches. They labeled many treatments evil. It didn't matter how far they fell, how many people died from lack of treatment, how squalid, dangerous, or amoral, it only mattered they stayed in power.

Unbelievable as it seems, it looks like we are getting to see a replay of how this was managed. Dismantling of the medical system- the uneducated ignorant are ignoring, delegitimizing and labeling as evil, things they don't understand. If you told me, even 10 yrs ago this would be possible I would have laughed. Not laughing now. This is dam scary and the long term implications are even more so. Even if this case doesn't succeed, the legal system is no longer trustworthy. Practicing medicine is like a giant minefield- the jeopardy for practicing evidence based medicine is real depending on where you are, or as this shows- even if you chose to avoid the crazy places.
 
It destroys the very concept of legal standing as well. This group of doctors incorporated in Amarillo, TX days after the Dobbs decision and sued on behalf of women they never treated. If this stands, literally any doctor could sue on behalf of anyone, on any medication or treatment or vaccine.
 
We are watching the dismantling of the country. It only works if people respect the systems. There are a whole subset of people who are willing to destroy hundreds of yrs of precedent, judges who are going along. Even if the suits are thrown out, the cost and the time are so disruptive it can't sustain. So freaking glad I am no longer in the system. It would scare the bejesus out of me. (At this point only 1 of my peers is still practicing. Everyone else is out.)
 
We are watching the dismantling of the country. It only works if people respect the systems. There are a whole subset of people who are willing to destroy hundreds of yrs of precedent, judges who are going along. Even if the suits are thrown out, the cost and the time are so disruptive it can't sustain. So freaking glad I am no longer in the system. It would scare the bejesus out of me. (At this point only 1 of my peers is still practicing. Everyone else is out.)

Correct on all counts. See 1980.
 
There are big consequences to dismantling the medical system by having ignorant, non-medical judges insert themselves into issues they do not understand or have the training to deal with. This could be drugs, procedures, devices, equipment...

A little snippet of what the Medical media are saying

"If this decision is upheld, any federal judge could ban any drug -- even one that had been approved for more than 22 years and has been demonstrated to be objectionably safe and effective...."
"Imagine this situation: a political faction maintains sexual activity should solely take place for procreation purposes.... engaging in sexual activity outside of a reproductive, marital event is a grave sin....They claim there is proof that a particular drug, meant to improve sexual performance, is hazardous and deadly....the drug may have uses for erectile dysfunction during procreative sex [but] the primary use is likely for non-procreative means. If an organization believes this drug is primarily used for non-procreative sexual activity, which they contend is evil, and can find "research" highlighting its dangers, could the organization file suit against the FDA hoping to ban the drug? Could the same be true with vaccinations? Or contraceptives? If the Texas judge's ruling stands, yes."

https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinio...rAbZiZRPZtvq6mwQLN4hQsYbNarDZxabKaXcMWuqCUQJM
 
It doesn't end with medicine. The violence done to the concept of standing is such that an ER doctor could sue a gun manufacturer because said doctor might, in the future, have to treat a gun violence victim.

Or an EMT could sue Ford because the EMT might have to respond to a car accident.

One of the very fundamental tenants of modern jurisprudence is that you must be impacted in order to sue. And in this decision, the plaintiffs lay no claim on that at all; in fact their claim is that they might have to treat a patient who could, maybe, be negatively impacted by mifestiprone.


That's how mind bogglingly backwards this is, and to no surprise, how bonkers the 5th circuit has become for not overturning the decisio on that alone.
 
The Supreme Court on Wednesday extended a temporary stay to maintain the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone amid ongoing litigation. The administrative stay will be in place until the end of day Friday.

So, it'll be banned Friday. They love to give hated rulings on Fridays.
 
facepalm-annoyed.gif
 
Kinda annoying we have no idea when the Court will issue its order today. Been checking the website every so often but nothing. At least with opinions we know when they are released so we're not left hanging all day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top