As I mentioned a week or so ago, Texas Representative Louis Gohmert (R) tested positive for COVID-19 and announced that, on the recommendation of his doctor, he was going to start a regimen of HCQ, Azithromycin and zinc.
This week, Rep Gohmert announced he was recovering from the disease and had experienced only mild symptoms. He said further:
“I just wish everybody had the chance to have their doctor prescribe what they think is best,” Gohmert told a reporter for OAN. “It is really tragic that a bunch of bozos who are not physicians, they’re not doctors of any kind, they’re high-tech people, they’re liberals, they’re alt-left people, and they decided to get between doctors and their patients. It is rather tragic.”
OK, but HCQ still isn’t available in Texas.
Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar (D) mocked President Trump in May when she implied that the President was hallucinating because he was taking HCQ. But, what she didn’t mention was that her husband had tested positive for COVID-19 in March and had been given HCQ.
To be fair, MN hadn’t yet banned HCQ when her husband took it. But she should have been equally as open when she mocked the President.
In a subsequent interview, her statement was a bit more wishy-washy than Rep Gohmert’s: “I listened to the science there,” she said. “I think that we have to listen to the science and you have to listen to your doctors with what is going to work in each individual situation.”
Nice going Amy. Way to cover your ass.
Both Texas and Minnesota have banned doctors from prescribing HCQ to treat COVID-19. Further, should a doctor prescribe HCQ anyway, pharmacies are banned from filling those prescriptions. If HCQ is not allowed to be used to treat COVID-19 by citizens of Texas and Minnesota, shouldn’t that also mean that a Senator’s spouse from Minnesota and a Representative from Texas should also be banned from using it?
So, for a moment, let’s not argue about whether or not HCQ is an effective treatment for COVID-19. That’s not the point of this post.
Let’s instead, argue this point: I assert that politicians should have no more access to any particular drug than do the people they govern. If you disagree, please tell me why.
