"It's because you can't have a treatment and [can] continue on with this push for vaccine," Merritt told host Dr. Alan Keyes during the February 1 episode of "Let's Talk America" on Brighteon.TV.
She related that when SARS broke out, the Chinese discovered that "chloroquine was very beneficial" in treating the disease. According to Merritt, Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) even published articles talking about hydroxychloroquine being potent against the virus.
"So there were a lot of people that were using this, and early on the Chinese were using this. So it was a mystery why we wouldn't be able to use it when this first came out and why it was being so condemned," Merritt said.
"Now, we're in the situation where we want to use ivermectin. First, they allowed us to prescribe it, no problem. And then what happened is the chain pharmacies all stopped dispensing it. You could prescribe it, but the chain pharmacies stopped dispensing it."
Merritt noted that there's so much evidence for ivermectin being an effective treatment for COVID-19. "Don't let them kid you. There are over 77 papers now, many of them peer-reviewed, showing huge benefits of ivermectin," she said.
"It doesn't make sense. When you have studies out there, like the Japanese just came out and said 'large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin,' why wouldn't we use it?"
It all goes back to the vaccines and the huge amounts of money it will bring gto Big Pharma companies and their cohorts.
"This is really experimental stuff, and they cannot do this if there's an available treatment. And they have to take down this whole treatment program to get you to take the vaccine," Merritt said. "They had to do it quickly under EUA [emergency use authorization], because it allows them to put out a vaccine or a drug that's critical to the well-being of people without telling what's in it legally."
EUA-approved vaccines have an extraordinary liability shield under the 2005 Public Readiness and Preparedness Act. Vaccine manufacturers, distributors, providers and government planners are safe from liability.
That liability shield is apparently more robust than the protection a COVID-19 vaccine can give to people. Merritt, in fact, thinks that the COVID-19 vaccine isn't designed to protect at all.
She cited circumstantial evidence to prove her point. (Related: SOMEBODY TELL WHOOPI: Covid-19 vaccines are projected to kill TEN TIMES the number of Holocaust victims in 2022 alone.)
"In 2020, the year of COVID, the death rate was 7.612 per 1000, which is less than the average death rate between 1950 and 2015 – so there was not a huge death rate in 2020. However, a CEO of an insurance company said, 'We've never seen an increase in all-cause mortality, as we did in 2021 – [a] 40 percent increase in working age people between 18 and 64.'"
Merritt was referring to Scott Davison, the CEO of OneAmerica, a $100 billion life insurance and retirement company headquartered in Indianapolis.
"We're seeing right now the highest death rates we've ever seen in the history of this business. The data is consistent across every player in the business," Davison said earlier this month. "Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three sigma or 200-year catastrophe would be a 10 percent increase over pre-pandemic levels. So, 40 percent is just unheard of."
What's not unheard of is that the majority of working age Americans received the COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 – either voluntarily or because they were mandated to.
Follow Pandemic.news for more news related to the coronavirus pandemic.