My hearing Day 3. How many pieces of silver were the 'experts' given to do their best to ruin me and deprive the people of Maine COVID care?

Dr. Courtney got $125/hr but Mr. Big(shot) Dr. Faust received $500/hour to opine on my lack of fitness to practice medicine and justify permanent revocation of my license. Narratives don't come cheap

The Board looked bored. Was Dr. Fay-Leblanc knitting through the meeting? The Board’s two experts testified today about my extraordinary ignorance, lack of ability to understand a journal article, and careless disregard for the welfare of 3 patients.

Doctor Courtney doesn’t read journal articles: he sticks by the recommendations of government agencies and his specialty organization, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). IDSA was sued by Connecticut’s then-AG Richard Blumenthal (now Senator) 20 years ago for denying the existence of chronic Lyme disease, and if memory serves it collaborated in witch hunts to de-license doctors who treated chronic Lyme. Presaging today.

Courtney did not know the difference between an EUA product and a licensed drug. He incorrectly repeated a false claim made only once by FDA that the EUA for HCQ was withdrawn because you would need to administer a toxic dose to get benefit. He had clearly failed to give that assertion any thought. Nor had he evaluated the US government literature showing it to be false.

Here is what I wrote about this false claim more than 2.5 years ago:

You have federal and UN agencies make false, illogical claims based on models (or invention) rather than human data.  For example, you have the FDA state on June 15 that the dose required to treat Covid is so high it is toxic, after the Recovery and Solidarity trials have been exposed for toxic dosing.  This scientific double-speak gives some legal cover to the clinical trials that overdosed their patients. According to Denise Hinton, RN, the FDA’s Chief Scientist (yes, a registered nurse without scientific qualifications is the Chief Scientist at FDA), or perhaps a clumsy FDA wordsmith: 

“Under the assumption that in vivo cellular accumulation is similar to that from the in vitro cell-based assays, the calculated free lung concentrations that would result from the EUA suggested dosing regimens are well below the in vitro EC50/EC90 values, making the antiviral effect against SARS-CoV-2 not likely achievable with the dosing regimens recommended in the EUA. The substantial increase in dosing that would be needed to increase the likelihood of an antiviral effect would not be acceptable due to toxicity concerns.”

You have a WHO report claim toxic doses are needed. This is nonsense since:

• In 2005, CDC researchers showed strong effects against SARS-1 at safely achievable concentrations.  Here is the relevant quote, “The infectivity of coronaviruses other than SARS-CoV are also affected by chloroquine, as exemplified by the human CoV-229E [15]. The inhibitory effects observed on SARS-CoV infectivity and cell spread occurred in the presence of 1–10 μM chloroquine, which are plasma concentrations achievable during the prophylaxis and treatment of malaria (varying from 1.6–12.5 μM) [26] and hence are well tolerated by patients.” A reader asked me to note that this study was done in tissue culture.

• The drug at normal doses is being tested in over 30 different medical conditions (see clinicaltrials.gov)

He thought I should have treated 2 outpatients with monoclonal antibodies, but eventually agreed that cases in December 2021 were a mix of Omicron and Delta when the patients were ill, that none of their variants had been sequenced so we did not know which variant they had, and the monoclonals would not have worked against Omicron variants, which were likely to have been present then.

After opining that I lacked the fitness to practice medicine, he was unable to identify a single thing I had done wrong in my records. I was criticized for taking 20 minutes to return a message on a Sunday. I sent 2 patients to the ER when they did not recover as expected, although one of the board’s initial charges against me was that I had failed to do so. (The Board had not read the records carefully, and were simply throwing lots of spaghetti on the wall to try and overwhelm me with charges so I would wilt and surrender my license, when this spectacle began in January 2022.)

Dr. Faust was up next. You probably recall the 1594 Dr Faustus play by Christopher Marlowe and the later opera Faust by Gounod, in which Faust, a prideful intellectual, sells his soul to the Devil. To see Dr. Jeremy Faust in action is simply too coincidental: it is proof that there is a God, who loves to remind us with comedic interludes that “all the world’s a stage.” Did Jeremy sell his common sense to the Devil?

In case you are unfamiliar with Dr. Faust’s written work, let me provide a sample:

Faust JS, Rasmussen SA, Jamieson DJ. Pregnancy should be a condition eligible for additional doses of COVID-19 messenger RNA vaccines. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022 Nov 09; 5(2):100801. [He thinks pregnant women deserve more than one mRNA jab. He publicly melted down when the mask mandate on planes was lifted, accusing CDC of killing babies.—Nass]

Faust JS. Why I Live-Tweeted Residency. Ann Emerg Med. 2017 Feb; 69(2):255-256.

Dr. Faust reported he was receiving $500/hr from the Board of Medicine for his testimony and this was less than he earned elsewhere. Not bad for a doc who only practices medicine 10-15 hours a week in an ER, is not a medical school professor but rather is an instructor, the lowest rank, and spends most of his time as Editor in Chief for a popular online medical magazine, tweeting, writing and pontificating. In fact, he self-reports that he tweeted his way through his residency.

May I remind you that this Board asserted I was attention-seeking, as if this was sufficient ‘psychiatric’ grounds to remove my license. Dr. Jeremy is at least an order of magnitude more attention-seeking than I. What will Dr. Waddell make of him?

Dr. Faust claimed to have a great interest in epidemiology. But apparently no special training in the field, no degree, not even an MPH. He has testified that he studied hard and read a lot in order to master this field, a field in which he lacks formal qualifications. I was an instructor at UMass medical school over 30 years ago. Meaning that our qualifications wrt training, epidemiology and med school teaching rank were virtually identical.

Faust was the Board’s epidemiology expert. He got some of the epidemiology right and he got a lot wrong. His arrogance when he was not sure of the answer was off-putting. He insulted Yale epidemiology professor Harvey Risch. He insulted my ability to read a journal article and he had a novel theory that this was sufficient disqualification to justify revoking my license. No one mentioned that Dr. Courntney could not cite journal articles used for forming his opinions on COVID treatment, having solely relied on pronouncements from government agencies. Should his license be revoked for that? Of course not.

Dr. Faust also failed to take note of my CV, which includes among other articles a review article on anthrax vaccines that included 102 references, and my six Congressional testimonies. Apparently 5 different Congressional committees thought I was competent to interpret the medical literature for them, while Jeremy judged me to be a schlub.

The questioning of Dr. Faust is likely to take half a day more. Then I have 8 witnesses to go, including 3 patients who are at issue. I doubt we will finish in the 2 more hearing days allotted. Right now, the next date for the hearing is March 2, but another day might be inserted before then as everyone realizes this will likely not end in 5 days.

I am being cagey about what Dr. Faust got wrong, lest he correct himself for the record, before we have a chance to cross examine him. I wish this moved faster, but it seems to be moving at the speed of law.

140,000 people tuned in. Thank you so much for your support!