Government Dictated Medicine disregards individual patient’s needs
Government Dictated Medicine eliminates physicians’ personal responsibility
for harm caused by one-size-fits-all medical practice.
History teaches us that Government-Dictated Medicine is a perversion of medicine.
Dr. Meryl Nass, MD, a longtime member of the board of directors of the AHRP is the latest doctor under siege for practicing ethical medicine that puts patients’ interest first. Dr. Nass has been in practice for 41 years, safely treating patients with chronic, difficult illnesses prevailing medical system has abandoned. Although not a single patient complaint has been filed against Dr. Nass, with The Maine Medical Board, the Board is revoking her license to practice medicine. Her crime was prescribing FDA-licensed medicines that had a long therapeutic record, and that she encouraged her patients to communicate as needed, by telephone, text, and emails.
Who would you trust, a government bureaucrat who almost never treated living patients, or a dedicated doctor who not only treats each patient as an individual, but is available to her patients free of charge, on her own time?
The Constitutional amendments I have excerpted below are the premier law of the land. States and state agencies are not allowed to abridge these rights, which have been granted to all US citizens. However, my state’s Medical Board is trying hard to abridge them. The Board has apparently realized they do not have the evidence to convict me of anything, so they are now going on a fishing expedition, asking for a list of every patient I have seen during the past six months, and much more.
The reason my story has gotten so much press is because the Board ordered a neuropsychological evaluation of me–which leads to mandatory reporting to a national physician database, and makes my case accessible to the media.
Since the Maine Medical Board wanted to “out” me publicly, I feel no compunction about telling my side of the story to the public, and I will continue to do so.
For those who feel there must be a fire where there is smoke, and that I may in fact be a danger to my patients, I would like you to know my history and the facts as I see them. I was probably one of the safest and most careful physicians in the state:
There has not been a single complaint to the Board by a patientin this case. Not one.
I have never been accused or charged with malpractice, in 41 years of practicing medicine.
I have only ever had one complaint to a Medical Board, about 15 years ago, and the complainant apologized to me after the investigation, once he learned my treatment was excellent. The Board found in my favor then.
I am well known for successfully treating very challenging cases of chronic, undiagnosed illnesses.
I am listed in Who’d Who in Americaand Who’s Who in the World for my accomplishments, which included the first scientific analysis of an epidemic that proved it was due to biological warfare.
I have spent most of my career trying to serve patients who were ‘left behind’ by the prevailing medical system. This included soldiers being forced to receive a dangerous anthrax vaccine, and those who were injured by it; veterans with Gulf War syndrome; patients with chronic fatigue syndrome; with Lyme disease; and patients with puzzling illnesses that other doctors were unable to diagnose and/or treat. I pivoted my practice to focus on the best care of COVID precisely because other doctors failed to prescribe treatments that would keep the vast majority of patients out of the hospital.
I charged a one-time fee of $60 to treat COVID–this included as much treatment as needed for no additional cost. I am flabbergasted that the Board is criticizing my charting of many text messages, phone calls and emails, and calling them “telemedicine visits” as if each one deserved a history and physical. Don’t other doctors chat briefly with their patients outside the office any more?
I spoke to patients nights and weekends, and made brief notes of these many encounters, which I think is exactly what other doctors do. The Board has tried to turn my exemplary care of patients and one missed phone call (the doc had left the hospital when I called back) into a charge of negligence. And then into a charge of cognitive decline or psychiatric illness.
It seems that if you do not support vaccinations that the CEOs of Pfizer and BioNTech have now deemed practically worthless, and you treat patients with usually effective, legal medicines like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, then you must be stopped, whatever it takes.
The Board wants to cut off these patients’ access to cheap, safe and effective COVID medicines, and deny them any choice. It even wants to cut off their access to treatment information.
I do not intend to roll over while the Board trashes the First Amendment, imposes government-designated medical care on patients, and destroys the sacred bond between patients and their physicians.
Meryl Nass
*Tony Fauci is the Director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Francis Collins just stepped down as the Director of the National Institutes of Health. Lawrence Tabak is the current Acting Director of the National Institutes of Health. All three are shown in numerous emails to have covered up the role of the NIH in funding research in Wuhan through a pass-through organization, created a fake scientific paper designed to kill the lab origin hypothesis (without disclosing their role), and worked to get articles published to destroy the Great Barrington Declaration and its 3 prominent authors. Fauci has also perjured himself to Congress on multiple occasions.
AMENDMENT I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
AMENDMENT IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
AMENDMENT XIV – Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Dr.Meryl Nass’s license was temporarily suspended after Maine’s Board of Licensure in Medicine voted to investigate the claims against her and suspend her ability to practice medicine for 30 days …
Dr.MerylNass has compiled a damning … Honest doctors who dispute the official Covid-19 narrative are undersiege; they are subjected to a coordinated government-media censorship campaign. Medical doctors are being threatened for using their professional judgment which is supported by both scientific and clinical evidence.
In one interview, Dr. Maryl Nass, an internal specializing in toxicology, vaccine-induced illness, and Gulf War Illness, explained her thoughts about the dangers of the vaccine against covid-19. She also explained how the vaccine got FDA approved for children at the age of 5. She explained the conflict of interest within the US FDA that …
Dr.MerylNass has compiled a damning … Honest doctors who dispute the official Covid-19 narrative are undersiege; they are subjected to a coordinated government-media censorship campaign. Medical doctors are being threatened for using their professional judgment which is supported by both scientific and clinical evidence.
By Dr.MerylNass, MD | August 23, 2021 This is a convoluted legal argument, but since it hinges on the potential loss of huge amounts of money, I think there is a good chance my guess is correct. EUA or “authorized” vaccines and drugs are defined as experimental. Experimental products require informed consent, and…
