More on my case, the law on misinformation, and why other doctors don’t challenge their medical boards

Including the misdirection, sloppiness and impaired memory of Dr. Faust, the part-time ER doctor and pundit/ expert witness

HCQ studies can be found at https://c19hcq.org/meta.html#fig_fp.
The results are very similar. There are only 3 negative studies and
14 positive studies. In order to claim that the medical literature
found against both drugs, Faust had to
find a way to dismiss over 75% of the studies—which he did by claiming
that according to the Faust criteria, they were not up to snuff, and so
therefore he was entitled to pretend they did not exist. Unlike the
forest plot criteria or the Risch criteria for how studies were selected
for inclusion in a plot, or selected for good quality, the Faust
criteria were (necessarily) unwritten.

This is especially
important because Faust said that I should lose my medical license due
to my inability to interpret the medical literature. Were this
criterion applied to Faust, I fear his own license would be revoked.

Now
let’s look at Dr. Faust a bit more. While he implied he was not the
Editor-in-Chief of MedPage (calling himself only a contractor in March
under cross-examination and claiming on May 30 that while
Editor-in-Chief was his title, he implied it was not his real job) Faust proudly calls himself Editor-In-Chief of MedPage on his LinkedIn page.

And
he advertises for medico-legal consulting on his LinkedIn. Someone
should explain to him that being clear, consistent and honest are
necessary for expert witnesses, even in Board proceedings.

Below
Dr. Faust reveals that his snide, nasty remarks are not confined to the
witness stand, as he snarkily comments on Alan Dershowitz and Trumps’
White House doctor Ronny Jackson, now a member of the House of
Representatives from Texas.

I
found this one (below) to be Dr. Faust’s most unpleasant tweet of all,
which was associated with video taken on a plane of passengers clapping
when the end of the mask mandate was announced: “Imagine celebrating
the deaths of a small number of kids so that you don’t have to wear a
mask on a plane.” The Daily Mail picked it up. Did he think masks
worked for the wearer? If so, wear them. Did he think COVID was
killing kids? Instead of looking at the CDC’s uninterpretable data,
which lumps everyone with a positive COVID test (asymptomatic or not) as
a COVID case, he could have looked at countries in western Europe or
Israel, where healthy kids were not dying from COVID. In fact, not a single person aged 18-49 who was previously healthy died from COVID in Israel, population 9 million. (Data are from Israeli Ministry of Health’s available information.)

Dr.
Faust wrote a letter to the editor of the BMJ, published March 20,
2020, at the start of the pandemic.  This is board exhibit 233.  He
ended the letter noting the “importance of aggressive, early mitigation
to minimize spread of infection.”  Yet Dr. Faust told us that I, Dr.
Nass, was wrong for providing early drug treatment, while he failed to
provide such treatment.  Isn’t this contradictory? 

Faust’s own
publication, MedPage Today, ran an article urging that medical boards
should not punish physicians who perform illegal abortions in states
that ended abortion.  I think it further claimed that boards that
investigate physicians who perform illegal abortions are being
weaponized and/or politicized. (In other words, how dare they
investigate this crime?) Yet he apparently feels that boards who
prosecute physicians like me for misinformation (which is free speech
according to the First Amendment) and who committed no crime should have
their licenses revoked. Faust apparently failed to notice the bias
inherent in this position, when he was asked by my attorney about
whether he could serve as an unbiased witness.

To recap my case:
the Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine voted unanimously to suspend my
medical license on January 11, 2022 for spreading misinformation
despite no patient complaints and without a hearing, because I was an
alleged danger to the patients of Maine for warning them about the
dangers of COVID vaccines and treating them for COVID with antiviral
drugs that worked.

It is now 16 months later, and any doubts that
the so-called COVID vaccines are safe and effective have been allayed:
they are neither. Prescribing antivirals off label is admitted by all
to have been legal. My speech regarding important medical products is
protected by the First Amendment, and the cowards that suspended my
license for misinformation were unwilling to actually bring a case
against me for it. So they then concocted a new set of claims about my
incompetence, despite no allegations claiming any failures in my
care—ever. Now all these secondary, bogus allegations that were
litigated in lieu of the original charges have all been shot down, shown
to be incorrect, fanciful hot air. Similar to what comes out of Dr.
Faust’s mouth when sound emerges.

The Congressional
Research Service (CRS) has advised Congress that the charge of
‘misinformation’ will not stand. The Supreme Court has only
upheld the charge of misinformation when fraud, perjury or defamation
were involved, according to the CRS. As I have said before, the USG and its proxies are still trying to create a crime where one does not exist: misinformation and/or disinformation.
They continue to assert it is a crime, but they do not dare to bring a
case to court. Yet the collusion of government and media has led most
people to believe that misinformation is a real crime—and it is held
over many peoples’ heads to keep them in line. This is government by
lies and innuendo. We must end it.

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12180 A snippet is below.

But
the bottom line in the prosecution of doctors for upholding their oaths
and trying to protect their patients with honest care, undeterred by
harmful government edicts, is:

a) the price of admission to a courtroom, and

b) the price to a doctor’s career, even if he or she wins their case.

It
is costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend myself against
defamatory, career-ending charges that are entirely without substance.
CHD has supported my defense, otherwise I too would have had to shut up
and accept the loss of my career. The black mark on my record can never
be erased, even if I win. Were I to seek employment or a license in
another jurisdiction, the black mark of an immediate suspension will
follow me forever.

The Board staff are dragging this out forever
in what appears to me to be an attempt to run up the costs of my
defense. That is how the game is played when you are losing: you delay
delay delay and you bleed the other side.

You can see why few
doctors willingly challenge these charges, and instead try to keep their
heads down and find a way to keep practicing.

You can see why the
Boards want to keep their ridiculous processes secret, in which they
can behave in as arbitrary and capricious a manner as they like,
negotiating sealed agreements with physicians under attack. (One example
of board lawlessness was Dr. Gleaton, the sleepy board chair, telling
me it was against the law to record the meeting where the Board first
heard about my case and suspended me. I had no lawyer, and I was not
allowed to speak, and no transcript was made. This violated
Administrative Law, but she did not care so long as I had no one there
to guide me. Luckily, I recorded it anyway, since my recorder was
already on, and I did not believe her. A second example is the board
suspending my license without a hearing, when there are statutory
requirements for such an immediate suspension, and my case did not meet
them.)

So you can see why the doctors who publish the
c19study.com website with the forest plots, and many other practicing
doctors who challenge the system, keep their names hidden or write under
pseudonyms. Doctors and nurses live in a climate of fear. Winning my case, and countersuing the Board, is only the first step in turning this around. And
we must, if we want the practice of medicine to be a sacred mission in
which only the doctor and the patient are in the room together, trying
to do the best for only that patient. Pharma, the insurance companies,
the government and its boards, and the W.H.O. need to be tossed out of
the exam room, for good. I’m working on it.