TehCaster | 15 points | Apr 22 2021 01:24:24

Original: https://www.novinky.cz/domaci/clanek/sukl-hrozi-pravu-pokutou-az-pul-milionu-za-clanky-o-ivermektinu-40357705

Translate: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.novinky.cz/domaci/clanek/sukl-hrozi-pravu-pokutou-az-pul-milionu-za-clanky-o-ivermektinu-40357705

You might remember the stuff from Pravo newspaper/online novinky.cz version I've been posting. They were the first mass media to start writing about IVM in Czechia, rather aggressively, and I think contributed to the emergency authorization.

Now the Czech medicine authority SUKL says those articles were illegal advertisement for human medicine and threatens with a fine up to 0.5M czk (around $23k).

One of the claims of the newspaper that's investigated here is "According to Professor Marik, ivermectin significantly reduces the risk of mortality, especially when given at an early stage of the disease." or "Ivermectin has been administered to humans for thirty years as an antiparasitic with virtually no side effects. "

Now this is under the law that regulates advertisement which requires that for human medicine this is only allowed for registered medicine and according to its intended use, so no off-label stuff. The articles they cite were published before the emergency authorization I think (in case that changes anything).

So SUKL wants to know who ordered/paid for this advertisement and the newspaper has 7 days to provide that info. Obviously there can be no-one doing that because no-one is selling IVM to public here. The intention of this law is that you don't see false advertisement on TV to buy overpriced OTC stuff that does nothing (interestingly, I remember seeing advertisements for homeopathic crap back when I was watching TV which I don't for years now... guess that's not a problem?).

The newspapers's chief editor/majority owner has already said in the past that they did this on their own so that people know about this important treatment and push for its registration/availibility. He denies any advertisement motives - who would make any money of this cheap off-patent medicine, anyway.

Then he says that because they also wrote articles about Bamlanivimab and Regeneron calling for their more wider use (the rules for eligibility to be treated used to be strict here, that improved only recently), they should be also prosecuted for these ones, so he will just report the newspaper himself right now.

Well, this will be interesting to watch unfold...

permalink