Bill Watch takes a closer look at what’s notable about legislation grinding its way through the Capitol. Subscribe to our newsletters for more from Wisconsin Watch.
One Republican bill in a “medical freedom” package seeks to ensure doctors can’t be punished for trying novel therapies, but it makes one notable exception that denies that freedom for all.
Here’s what you need to know:
- The bill: AB 609 would prohibit “discrimination or retaliation against health care providers by health care entities and credentialing boards for ordering or discussing innovative or novel therapies,” but explicitly does not apply to puberty blockers prescribed to transgender youth. Rep. Shae Sortwell, R-Two Rivers, introduced a similar proposal last year, as part of a “medical freedom” package, but it died in committee. The previous bill made no mention of puberty blockers.
- Some context: The bill emerges out of concern for doctors promoting treatments that have been proven ineffective for treating COVID-19. In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, medical providers tried to repurpose existing drugs, such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. But while early indications seemed promising, a robust body of research now shows neither is an effective COVID-19 treatment. Yet some still promote the drugs, spurring attempts to sanction doctors who spread medical misinformation. This bill would shield providers who continue to prescribe these treatments. At least one physician who prescribed ivermectin was reprimanded by the Wisconsin Medical Examining Board for “departing from or failing to conform to the standard of minimally competent medical practice which creates an unacceptable risk of harm to a patient or the public” after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control warned against its use for COVID.
Related Story
Did the FDA reverse course and say it’s OK to take ivermectin if you have COVID-19?
No. The Food and Drug Administration on Aug. 16, 2023, reiterated that, for treating COVID-19, it has not approved and does not recommend the drug ivermectin.
- Why watch: The co-sponsorship memo says the bill “seeks to reverse the unprecedented level of interference with the physician-patient relationship that has been witnessed over the past two years, whether it pertains to the treatment of COVID-19 or other diseases.” Yet these same lawmakers support outlawing abortion and gender-affirming care for trans youth. Open records show Sortwell’s staff has communicated with Wisconsin United for Freedom, a group whose list of “doctors to follow” includes Andrew Wakefield, who lost his medical license after his paper that falsely claimed vaccines cause autism was retracted.
- Pro: Introducing his similar bill last year, Sortwell said in a press conference: “We don’t need group-think. We need doctors to be able to be doctors.” He and his office didn’t respond to two requests from Wisconsin Watch for an interview.
- Con: Not a single Democrat has signed on. In response to last year’s bill, Wisconsin Medical Society Board of Directors Chair Dr. Jerry Halverson told WPR in a statement: “There is an ever-evolving body of accepted COVID‐19 science helping physicians treat and counsel their patients, and we have not heard concerns about regulatory boards, health care entities or pharmacies stifling these appropriate physician‐patient interactions.” A spokesperson said Halverson’s prior statement still stands.
- Next step: The bill was referred to the Assembly Committee on Health, Aging and Long-Term Care, but it has not yet been scheduled for a public hearing.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
