Dr. Meryl Nass, who been a board-licensed internal physician in Maine for more than 40 years, has had her license suspended while a Maine board conducts an investigation that includes a psychological examination for allegedly spreading “misinformation” about COVID-19 and administering effective treatments such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
In an article published by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense, she tells “The Extraordinary Story of How Governments Suppressed Effective COVID Treatments and Targeted Physicians Who Prescribed Them.”
She points out that health authorities knew about chloroquine, the milder derivative hydroxychloroquine and other treatments for COVID-19 before there was a COVID-19.
That’s because they documented its effectiveness during the 2003 SARS the 2012 MERS epidemics.
“But they hushed it up,” she wrote.
Nass has compiled a “stunning collection” of more than 50 ways authorities and pharmaceutical companies in multiple countries stopped the use of chloroquine drugs for COVID.
“‘Avoiding the Trump drug’ served as a great cover story. Taking hydroxychloroquine for COVID was equated to drinking bleach,” she wrote.
WND reported in January that Nass, along with her clinical practice, is a biological warfare epidemiologist who has developed a model for analyzing epidemics to assess whether they are natural or man-made. She has testified to Congress six times and to several state legislatures on bioterrorism, Gulf War syndrome and vaccine safety. She has consulted for the World Bank, the Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Director of National Intelligence regarding the prevention, investigation and mitigation of chemical and biological warfare and pandemics.
In her article, she pointed to a 2005 paper published by the CDC showing chloroquine was an effective drug against SARS coronaviruses. European scientists came to a similar conclusion in 2004.
The CDC study found “chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-COV infection … suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.”
And in 2014, scientists at Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases came to the same conclusion. Further, the NIAID study found a total of 66 screened drugs were effective at inhibiting either MERS-CoV or SARS-CoV infection in vitro. And 27 of the compounds were effective against both MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.
“I have to repeat myself because the information is so shocking and I don’t want you to miss it: Our governments already knew of options for treating COVID before it appeared — but instead of immediately trying these already identified, safe, cheap and available drugs, and offering early treatments, they did everything they could to stop people from obtaining the chloroquine drugs,” Nass wrote.
‘Huge media offensive’
She pointed out that while ivermectin was not identified in the studies, in early 2020 it was found to be effective against COVID-19. The French company MedinCell, working with Monash University and supported by Bill Gates, was developing an injectable version.
But after ivermectin exploded in popularity as a treatment for COVID-19, doctors were threatened with the loss of their licenses for prescribing it, and pharmacists for fulfilling the prescriptions.
“You couple that with a huge media offensive, and threats from an industry of medical ‘nonprofits,'” Nass wrote. “You invent ‘misinformation’ as a medical misdemeanor, studiously failing to define it. You make people think the legal prescribing of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine is a crime, even though off-label prescribing is entirely legal under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
“Did Fauci give the order? Was it CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky? Maybe it was acting FDA Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock?” she asked. “It was probably some combination, plus the public relations professionals managing the messaging and the media.”
In her article, she presents a detailed chronology of the government’s suppression of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as treatments for COVID-19. And she recounts the anti-“misinformation” campaign that led to the suspension of her license.
‘Scientifically unvalidated and potentially dangerous’
In August 2021, various non-profit medical organizations, with no regulatory authority, began issuing warnings, including the American Medical Association, which said: “A handful of doctors spreading disinformation have fostered belief in scientifically unvalidated and potentially dangerous ‘cures’ for COVID-19 while increasing vaccine hesitancy.”
The organizations told doctors they could lose their licenses or board certifications for such behaviors. Over three days at the end of August 2021, national media reported four doctors in three states were under investigation by boards for the use of ivermectin.
Later, the Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine targeted Nass and two other doctors, suspending or threatening their licenses for writing waivers for COVID vaccines, “spreading misinformation” and/or prescribing ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. All of those activities, she pointed out, are legal for doctors.
In her suspension order, Nass noted, the Maine board argued that ivermectin isn’t FDA “authorized or approved” as a treatment for COVID-19. It is, however, legal for her to prescribe it off-label, as so many other drugs are prescribed. But the board said her continuing to practice as a physician “constitutes an immediate jeopardy to the health and physical safety of the public who might receive her medical services, and that it is necessary to immediately suspend her ability to practice medicine in order to adequately respond to this risk.”
Poster child in a national fear campaign
She suspects that the Maine Board had calculated that she, at age 70 and charging very little for her COVID services, would not put up a fight. But on the day her license was suspended, to her surprise, there was massive national publicity about her case.
“The Hill, Newsweek, the Daily Beast and many other publications all ran hit pieces about me,” she wrote.
“I gathered that my situation was bigger than just a renegade Maine medical board: I had been selected to serve as an example to physicians nationwide who might be prescribing early treatment for COVID.”
And once she realized she was “being used as a poster child in a national fear campaign designed to purge doctors who think independently,” she decided to fight back.
Children’s Health Defense, Nass said, is helping her with her legal expenses.
That financial support, she wrote, “allows me to mount a strong attack against the bulldozing of free speech, patient autonomy and choice, and the doctor-patient relationship.”
“There is a lot riding on the outcome.”