Mr B, other than fruit of the vine, are heirloom seeds and sets local to your spread available? local skills, tools and wisdom too? hands to delegate or team with? what's the lay of the land? nosy aint i? years gone by i worked up to a 200 x 50 foot garden. sounds trivial till you weed it, lol. were i still in that mode, might work a 'lasagna garden' system. a section within 10 ha could mos def keep and feed many people busy. anytime you feel like posting something about that aspect, i'm sure to be looking forward to seeing it, wherever it may appear. just in case, https://www.motherearthnews.com/organic-gardening/lasagna-gardening-zmaz99amztak
We are the worst Covid affected country in the world
- Thread starter UsualName
- Start date
Well here is basically plant paradise, everything grows just you need to balance shade and water. Veg is veg, same as anywhere. I have across the world around a thousand acres in total so not quite Ted Turner yet.
If it is lawful to prescribe off label for the condition at hand, then that is a decision between the patient and his physician. "Prescribing" is what you refer to as "being given out widespread." But no one is advocating nor is it legal to just give this out- as you put it- over the counter.
If I make an informed decision to use a drug treatment with a physician who is acting lawfully, I am not concerned, nor is it any of your business how widespread that is or whether I am the only one doing it. If there is a widespread concern then you need to work it with the FDA- except they have already agreed to allow its use at the discretion of the patient's physician. If that causes bodies to pile up in the streets from people when people have not heretofore had serious complications from very short term usage and in very small quantities relative to what is currently being prescribed for other conditions then the FDA can withdraw its consent for to be prescribed for off-label use.
Meanwhile, your comment about it not "being given out widespread" because it would be malpractice is not upheld by the FDA. It is not in widespread use due to limited availability and because the virus is only recently upon us and because some doctors are not informed or are informed and do not want to use it. Those are reasons. Not because it would be malpractice if it becomes more widespread.
Anyway, on a libertarian level, as long as it is not unlawful, it is none of your business what I work out with my physician on this or any other condition. And no, there is no analogy over to abortion being a choice between mother and physician because an abortion results in the death of another human - another factor altogether.
The lawyers are already sharpening their teeth for cases where doctors gave it. Lawyers eh?
Wowsa!
A lot of it is rubbish land, but nearly all with a view.
Within the spirit of the law I don’t think a doctor would be found liable. However, a class action against the government based on the president of the United States statements may be something.
We are a litigious society and that will not change regardless. If hydroxy is used there will be many deaths among those using it because many people have underlying conditions and cannot be saved. Suddenly their families want multimillion dollar settlements because their severely, diabetic and obese family member died of hydroxy poisoning, whatever that is. I mean what else could have caused it.
The other side of this issue is that if hydroxy shows any value at all as a therapy there will be multimillion dollar lawsuits by the pantload against doctors who did not prescribe it and therefore failed to provide a basic duty to care for those afflicted and had hardship or death. And not just from deaths. If you spend three weeks on a ventilator and leave with half your lungs rotted out and your doctor never tried hydroxy because he hates Trump or doesn't use all possible means of care or whatever, then he is going to be sued and have action against his medical license.