War Against Doctors with Conscience with Dr Meryl Nass
Dr. Meryl Nass had her medical license suspended recently. Please write the Maine Board using their email addresses here:
Med Board Staff - https://www.maine.gov/md/about/contact-us
Members - https://www.maine.gov/md/about/board
The Maine Board of Licensure Wednesday ordered the immediate suspension of the license of a physician accused of spreading false COVID-19 information and, in a separate order Tuesday, ordered her to undergo a neuropsychological evaluation by a board-selected psychologist.
Read more about it: https://www.pressherald.com/2022/01/12/maine-doctors-license-suspended-over-covid-19-misinformation/
I wanted to do this podcast with one of my favorite people in the world, and I don't say that lightly.
My guest today is Dr.
Meryl Nast.
And many of you who have been around this movement for any period of time know her name.
She's a major figure in public health and protecting children.
And also, she's one of the, I think, the most reliable experts on bioweapons and biowarfare and She was one of the most eloquent critics of the anthrax vaccines.
She played a key role in the court cases to protect the military from those vaccines.
She was a critic of the Ebola response.
She's an incredible researcher, very, very careful, diligent, and she's one of the people that I rely on Or fact checking.
So if I say something that is wrong, I usually get a very polite note from Meryl saying you can't say that because the facts don't support it.
So we rely on Meryl.
But she's more than that.
She's really one of the best people I've ever met from a lot of every important viewpoint or integrity or values.
And her competence as a physician, if I or a member of my family had a really serious problem, I cannot think of a physician that I'd rather entrust my personal health to, my family's health to, than Marilyn has.
And she's amazing because she has this great curiosity about the world.
She's explored all over the world.
She has a curiosity and a love for humanity and for human beings individually.
She's somebody all of us rely on.
Even Robert Malone when he got married.
Sick from COVID, Meryl was a physician that he consulted, and Meryl has been with us on meeting with Attorney General.
She's somebody that everybody relies on in her integrity, and the reason that I have her on here today, I think if Hippocrates had to Describe an ideal physician that would look like Meryl Nass.
The reason I have her on here today is because Meryl is from Maine, and the Medical Licensing Board of Maine has just delicensed her for prescribing ivermectin.
Not only that, but in a Manoeuvre that is frighteningly reminiscent of the old Soviet state.
They have ordered her a psychiatric evaluation.
And, you know, it's really, it's an amazing story about where we are in this country.
We're actually practicing physicians who are healers are being punished and are being punished.
Vilified, gaslighted, marginalized, destroyed, delicensed, and then, you know, potentially, you know, clearly the ambition is to lock her in a mental institution and rid ourselves of these people who ask questions about official marriage.
Meryl, I'm about to take off for a couple of weeks, including to the Washington DC rally, where I think you're going to be speaking.
But I wanted to, I really wanted to have you on to talk about this because it's so alarming what is happening to you today.
It's so deeply disturbing that in my country, We are seeing this rise of this medical authoritarianism, and so many doctors are involved in this assault on the American Constitution.
That, I think, is one of the most disturbing things to me.
Tell us what happened.
Well, as you know, I have followed COVID with intense interest since the very beginning because I have a background in biological warfare and pandemics and I'm an internist.
So everything about the pandemic was of interest to me and I could make a lot of sense of it.
and I wrote many articles trying to explain all aspects of it to people, the testing, the masks, the treatments.
And I discovered early on that the chloroquine drugs were highly effective if used early, and I used them on my son.
The Chinese were using them widely early.
They told us in February of 2020 that chloroquine was one of their best drugs.
They had 20 clinical trials and it was easy to obtain until Trump said it was a good drug.
And then suddenly at the end of March last year, all sorts of measures were taken in the United States and other countries to suppress its availability, its use, and to give it a black mark, to give it a stain and to stop people using it.
I was familiar with the drug.
I've spent time in Africa.
I have taken chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine.
I've had malaria.
So I've taken it prophylactically.
And for treatment, I've treated a lot of Lyme patients, probably a couple of hundred Lyme patients with the drug.
I've used it for autoimmune diseases.
So I was very familiar with it.
I couldn't believe what I was seeing.
And I think very few doctors were as familiar with this drug as I was.
So I started paying attention at that point to the suppression and then started writing articles in May and June describing the suppression, which eventually resulted in 58 different methods by which hydroxychloroquine was being suppressed around the world.
And then the same thing happened with ivermectin, not on quite as grand a scale, at least I didn't document it as well, but the same thing happened with ivermectin.
And Then toward the middle of 2021, there was a shift.
As you know, the medical profession has been given these dreadful guidelines by which they are supposed to treat patients, which is go home, don't do anything except Tylenol and ibuprofen until your lips are blue and then show up in the ER, and then we'll admit you and give you oxygen and maybe remdesivir.
And then we got monoclonal antibodies and the criteria for using monoclonals varied all over the country.
So in some places you couldn't get it and in some places a patient could call up and make their own appointment and get it.
So really the use of monoclonals was not regulated properly and the side effects were not provided to people.
It's not clear what the side effects are, but I had a couple of patients who had bad reactions to it.
It is another experimental drug.
It's under EUA. Remdesivir was initially under EUA. It got licensed, but it got licensed without data supporting its benefit, and that was very strange.
So first I saw the suppression of hydroxychloroquine, then I saw the ascent of remdesivir, which didn't make any sense, was not being used in the rest of the world.
A dangerous drug with very little benefit.
It wasn't even being used at the right time.
It might have been somewhat effective if used early when hydroxychloroquine must be used, but it was being used late.
Then a couple of other drugs came in.
People were using low doses of dexamethasone, which is somewhat effective.
But the medical profession was basically being kept in the dark.
And what shocked me was that they didn't pull the mask off and start reading the literature.
Paying attention, looking at what other people were doing.
And even when Pierre Corey and Peter McCullough and Jane Orient went to Congress in December of 2020 and explained how wonderfully well these drugs worked in combinations and that we could really solve the problem of COVID, Ron Johnson had held that hearing.
Right before he lost his chairmanship when the Dems took over the Senate, YouTube suppressed part of the Senate hearing, one of the Senate hearings, and YouTube decided that any treatment guidelines that were different than the WHO's went against their community guidelines and should not be allowed to be broadcast.
So I saw...
Go ahead.
...that YouTube made WHO... The arbiter of what treatments could be discussed except with remdesivir because WHO doesn't work.
And yet YouTube was not censoring endorsements of remdesivir.
What Ryuji was doing was very, very selective.
The only consistency was support for Tony Fauci's policy for the pharmaceutical industry.
It had nothing to do with public health.
Yes.
So, I mean, that was, for whatever reason, YouTube, which is owned by Google and the CEO is the ex-wife of one of the Google founders, for whatever reason, decided to go on a rampage and start censoring medical information.
Subsequently, all sorts of other social media and channels on the internet also started censoring.
Censoring this information.
So here I am, you know, I'm used to living in the United States and really, you know, I've been a doctor 40 years, never seen anything like this before.
Maybe it happened and I missed it, but it seemed crazy to me.
And here we had the biggest pandemic ever.
So, you know, I wrote more and more about it and I, you know, I got more upset.
I had learned a little bit about the Constitution when I was involved with the anthrax vaccine 20 years ago, and I had learned about FDA law and the CDC, HHS, WHO, NIH, through that time, time, and I knew what they could legally do and what they couldn't legally do and found that they were actually exceeding their authorities, their legal authorities.
And in fact, Ron Johnson had asked the FDA how it was that it was now telling doctors how to practice medicine rather than simply describing how to use drugs, which is what its mission is supposed to be.
CDC also started exceeding its mission.
It started deciding whether landlords could get rid of tenants who didn't pay their bills.
I mean, this is not a public health measure.
I mean, CDC claimed it was, but this was an authority that was not granted to it, which the Supreme Court eventually took away from it.
CDC has a history of acting very politically, but it became extraordinarily political during the pandemic and started creating a lot of statistics that were completely off the wall, statistics regarding numbers of cases Severity of cases,
efficacy of masks, efficacy of distancing, all sorts of things that was not in accord with the data that was coming out of any other country, and particularly the number of people getting COVID who were vaccinated, where CDC was saying you were 20 times as likely to get COVID if you were unvaccinated, you were 20 times as likely to die.
This simply wasn't true.
We had data from Israel, from the U.K., From Iceland, from Denmark, other places.
We knew this was not true.
They were using the same vaccines we were using, and the data were very different.
So CDC became a completely corrupt, if it wasn't already, institution.
And they're all under HHS. And so is HRSA. HRSA manages the payments to people who've been injured by countermeasures.
Countermeasures are all the EUA products.
So the initial remdesivir The monoclonal antibodies, the masks, the tests, the vaccines are all under emergency use authorization.
If you're injured, you can only go to HRSA, which is a health resources agency in HHS, and ask them to pay you damages.
For COVID, there have been now about 5,000 applications for damages for people who say they've been damaged by an emergency use authorized product.
And I This CICP, which is within HRSA, the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, has apparently said one person It has so far been granted damages.
That's significant because there's a one-year statute of limitations.
So you have to prove that your injury was caused by the countermeasure, but CDC and NIH and FDA are suppressing the information that would allow you to prove whether or not your injury was due to a countermeasure.
So you've got this very brief statute of limitations.
You can't prove anything.
And it looks like the federal government is trying to basically hang on and wait people out And they'll never be able to collect.
And, you know, when lots of time has gone by, then they may allow us access to the information so we can figure out how dangerous or safe all of these products are.
So that's where we stand.
And of course, so I've been writing about this.
And then my medical board, along with about 15 other medical boards in the country, who were urged to do this by a nonprofit organization called the Federation of State Medical Boards, Said they were going to prosecute doctors for misinformation and disinformation.
So if I wasn't already upset with where medicine was going, that made me even more upset.
And I wrote to them and told them, will you please define misinformation and disinformation and tell me under what authority you can create this new crime?
Because our legislature hasn't been meeting.
Nobody voted in a new crime of misinformation.
And these idiots, you know, were told by a nonprofit organization that probably was paid off to advise them to do this.
And they just sucked it up and spit it out and started threatening doctors.
And at that point, you know, I decided I was willing to risk my license because this was...
This was something I was not going to accept.
And I asked them, I said, look, here's what I told the New Hampshire legislature, which I testified to a couple of months ago.
This is what I told them.
I told them about how the vaccines didn't work.
I gave them the evidence.
I told them other things about COVID. I asked them, is this misinformation?
And of course, they didn't answer me.
So eventually, and so just like the Stasi in East Germany, and this was after World War II, remember, this was up until 1990, the Board of Information told doctors, if you see something, say something.
If you see misinformation, tell us.
So now they've basically told the medical profession to start ratting out each other.
And so two doctors did.
And two random people off the street did as well.
The two random people said, I saw Dr.
Nass on a video online.
I've never met her.
And she's spouting misinformation, so I'm reporting it to the medical board.
And then a nurse practitioner and a doctor said, Dr.
Nass treated a patient that I also saw, and she gave that patient hydroxychloroquine in one case and ivermectin in the other.
And this is horse paste, and she has no business using these drugs, and so I thought I better report it to you.
None of these four complaints had anything to do with the patient being harmed, and none of my patients have complained.
And there was one more complaint, which was I wanted to prescribe hydroxychloroquine to a patient, which is a legal drug.
I am legally able to do so, and in my state...
The governor requires that the patient must have COVID in order to get hydroxychloroquine.
And this patient did have COVID. So I wrote a prescription.
I actually called it in.
And the pharmacist, which because they've been threatened too, they have to check on these prescriptions and find out whether it's an appropriate, legitimate prescription.
So he called and asked me, what was it for?
And had I said it was for COVID, he wouldn't have filled it because they're scared they will be investigated by the pharmacy board.
So I said it was for Lyme, and he filled it.
The patient got the prescription, and I immediately informed, within minutes, informed the medical board that I had done this and that this was a problem they and the pharmacy board had created, that this was a legal prescription.
You know, it's my obligation to take care of my patient.
I was trying to do so, and in order to take the best care of my patient, I was put in a position where I was forced to tell a lie.
And so that was the fifth matter that the board accused me of.
Now, I still thought that under the Constitution, there was something called free speech.
It was an amendment.
It hasn't been overturned yet.
And I thought I would be fine.
I didn't realize when I went into a very odd meeting on Tuesday that they really were planning to destroy me however they could.
So I was told I could watch the media, and my lawyer quit the day before.
So I went in without a lawyer, but the lawyer isn't allowed to speak either.
I was told I can't speak, but I can watch.
And then they asked me to open up my camera so they could make sure there was nobody else in the room with me.
I thought that was odd.
And then they asked me to pledge that I was not going to record the meeting.
I thought that was odd.
I said, how do I get a transcript of the meeting?
I said, you don't.
Okay.
So then they met for a couple...
And then they went into executive session and produced a litany of complaints against me.
All these things I had said to Dr. Mercola and, oh, my medical records weren't, my telehealth was not up to snuff, even though what they were calling telehealth visits was really little short notes on phone calls, text messages, and emails.
And then they said, you know, my competency with technical things, because I hadn't sent them the text messages exactly right.
And they had to remind me twice how to send the text messages from a patient encounter.
that maybe I was, you know, implied maybe I was a little demented.
I was certainly attention-seeking.
Maybe I was crazy.
They didn't seem to know who I was.
I imagine the lawyers did, but the doctor who presented my case said, I don't know if she's ever published a paper.
She said, she seems to read a lot.
Is that a crime now?
I read a lot.
So anyway, then they said, we're very upset.
We consider you a danger to your patients, an immediate danger.
And we are immediately taking your license away unless you surrender it, basically, and go into an active status.
And we are demanding you submit to a neuropsych exam.
And we have 25 questions we need you to answer, which was a fishing expedition.
You know, what kind of advertising do you do?
Do you offer vaccines?
You know, how many patients do you see in a week?
All sorts of things.
And then they said they want 10 charts.
Well, I have a practice where I don't take Medicare and Medicaid.
I charge very low fees, and people can pay what they want if they are short of money.
So there are no Medicare, Medicaid, federal, state agencies don't have copies of my records.
So I wondered how they would get, how would they figure this out?
So they immediately went to the controlled substances database and picked out the two patients I have who are on controlled substances.
And they said, we want these charts.
And then they said, we want a list of every patient you've seen in the last six months.
So I thought, huh, now they're going to probably try to figure out where, you know, where they can get the most bang for the buck.
So they're now on a fishing expedition because they didn't have anything in those first five matters that would be sufficient to really take away my license or show me as crazy.
They're going to look for something else.
And when I realized that, you know, I realized there's no reason.
I mean, also what they did By choosing to force me, because I'm required to, as a doctor, submit to a neuropsych exam, that then takes my case to a whole new level.
So instead of me being simply an alcoholic or a drug addict that they can rehabilitate, now my name immediately goes to the National Practitioner Database, which means it's going to be hard for me to get another job, hard for me to get a license in another state.
And the media are informed immediately about my case.
And that was unusual because for a little, you know, fiddling little case like this, you wouldn't normally put this kind of information out there.
So anyway, I thought, well, if they wanted to get media on this case, they can get media on the case.
And I will say exactly what I think.
And we'll see where this goes.
So let me just reiterate, there has not been a single complaint to the board by a patient in this case, not one.
You have never been accused or charged with malpractice in 41 years of practicing medicine.
You only had one complaint to a medical board 15 years ago.
And that complainant apologized to you after the investigation, once he learned that your treatment was excellent.
The board found it in your favor at that time.
You are listed in who's who in America and who's who in the world for your accomplishments, including the first scientific analysis of an epidemic that proved it was due to biological warfare.
You have spent a career trying to serve patients who were left behind by the prevailing medical system.
This includes soldiers being forced to receive dangerous anthrax vaccines and those who were injured by veterans with Gulf War syndrome, patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, With Lyme disease, other doctors were unable to diagnose and treat.
You have pivoted your practice to focus on the best care of COVID precisely because other doctors failed to prescribe treatments that would keep the vast majority out of the hospitals.
You charge, this is the kind of doctor Meryl Nass is, $60 to treat COVID. This is a one-time fee.
And you get the patients that get as much treatment as needed with no additional cost.
So this is the ideal doctor.
This is the doctor that we all wish we had.
And this is the doctor who's being railroaded by these criminal technocrats on the main licensing board for medicine.
And the question is, who are these people and how do we figure out ways to punish them?
How do the American people figure out ways to punish this criminal enterprise that is trying to silence this wonderful doctor because they don't want patients healed.
They want to be able to support patients The pharmaceutical narrative, pharmaceutical paradigm, pharmaceutical products, and silence people who are questioning these authorities.
Who are these people, Errol?
You know who they are, the people who are sitting on this board.
No, I don't know any of them.
Some of them are doctors.
Some of them are citizens.
And they are a state agency.
So these are volunteers who probably get paid per diem to sit on the board.
I think they may be well-meaning.
I think they have drunk the Kool-Aid.
They cannot see beyond what the government is telling them.
I understand that we have a system right now where the decision was made to, quote, flood the waves, flood the airwaves, flood the zone, and a uniform message about the dangers of these drugs.
And the benefits of the garbage that the government is prescribing for people is universally heard if you turn on the TV or the radio.
However, probably about 30 or 40% of the population has not bought into that.
And these are the people who seek me out.
I don't advertise.
I don't go looking for patients.
Every single one of my patients is a word of mouth.
And so these people chose something different and the state using these people on the board as their, you know, lackeys is doing its best to prevent people from getting information because I have a blog and they obviously don't like my blog.
and preventing them from accessing the drugs.
The idea is to force everybody into government-determined medical care.
Shoot everybody up with the same vaccine, give them the same medications.
I tell you, looking back on the last 20 years, I think the system has been trying to destroy the reputation of doctors, destroy the doctor-patient relationship, force this electronic medical record spits out treatments for doctors.
So if they punch in COVID, the computer tells them remdesivir.
It tells them whatever.
One person came to me, their mother was in the hospital, and the doctors wanted to give a woman this Janus kinase drug.
Well, it's another experimental drug for COVID. I looked it up.
The label says that if you take it, the mortality rate is higher than if you don't.
And so, you know, I don't know if the mother was going to be enrolled in a clinical trial.
The doctor couldn't tell the family very much about it.
But the medical system here in Maine, we have two large medical systems and everybody else, all other doctors were not part of those two systems.
Are being pushed out, squeezed out.
We are competition.
And they want to be able to dictate.
I mean, when you go to medical school, it's a very, very hierarchical method of training.
And you have to basically do whatever the people ahead of you tell you.
Otherwise, you will not succeed through medical school and residency.
That's a minimum seven-year commitment.
When my son went through it, it was a total of 14 years.
And You learn to keep your mouth shut and do what you're told.
And unfortunately, then you get a job.
In the old days, once you got a job and you were out of that, you could sort of be independent and do what you thought.
But now you can't.
Now almost everybody is an employee.
I remember the Clintons saw that medicine was a huge cottage industry that was taking up about 15% of GNP. And they said, we have to get our hands on this.
And, you know, they did.
I mean, they encouraged larger and larger institutions to form.
So if you've got a doctor's office and you've got one or two doctors and a couple of nurses and a couple of secretaries, everybody knows you.
And the doctors remember your history.
If you have a system where there's 100 doctors and 500 nurses, nobody knows you and nobody is responsible.
And the entire feeling of medical care changes.
So that seems to be what we're dealing with now, and I don't like it, and I'm happy.
If it's necessary for me to lose my license to fight this, I will do so.
This has to stop.
I mean, my profession is being destroyed from the inside, and I don't want to stand for it.
So, 400 years before Christ, Hippocrates set out the code for doctors, which doctors have followed up.
Every doctor when they're in medical school takes a Hippocratic oath, and that oath says that the relationship between the doctor and patient is sacred.
That the obligation of the doctor is to the patient.
It is not to the state.
It is not to any outside institution.
And this is recognized in our law.
There's a doctor-patient privilege.
But you tell your doctor it's privileged information because we want that confidentiality.
We want individuals to have faith that their doctor is the two of them against the world, that the doctor has no obligation to anybody else except the individual he's treating.
It is the central basis of Western medicine for 2,500 years.
And now you have these technocrats like Tony Fauci Who are saying we're going to change that relationship.
He said the obligation of the doctor is not to the patient.
The obligation is to the state.
The doctor is an instrument of state policy.
And once you make that decision, Medicine is no longer medicine.
Every decision the doctor makes is no longer for the health of that patient, but it's for the good of the society at all.
What we need to do now is to fight back.
And they say this medical committee, these quacks, these charlatans in Maine...
Who are attacking this doctor are saying, we're going to flood the zone.
We're going to publicly embarrass her.
We're going to condemn her as an insane person to discredit her.
We need to fight back.
And I am asking everybody who is listening to this podcast today, we are going to post, attached to this podcast to our website, a list of the names of all the members of this medical board.
And Meryl doesn't know that I'm going to say this to you today, but I am so angry at what they're doing to her.
And I hope all of the people who are listening to this podcast share my rage at these charlatans, these frauds, these quacks outers.
We need to tell them that we are not going to stand for it.
We're going to tell them that we want our medical advice given to us by doctors who are healers and not technocrats who are functionaries of a medical cartel and a pharmaceutical industry.
I'm going to post the names of all of these members of this rogue board And I hope that all of you will take the time to write them a note and express your feelings about what you're doing.
And I can tell you I'm going to be sitting around.
Trying to figure out if there's a way to sue them, sue them individually, sue them as a group, sue them for racketeering and fraud, whatever we can do to get justice and to return the medical profession to what it's supposed to do, which is healing.
Meryl Nass, thank you so much for your courage.
You know, we support you, we love you, and we will continue to do so.
