Author: Dr. Saeed Qureshi, Ph.D.

Many times people asked me how it is that I provided convincing arguments against the existence of the virus, invalid (PCR, antigen, etc.) testing, fake pandemic, and failed vaccine developments.

I made the predictions accurately early in the pandemic without being a medical expert. Further, why do others with similar academic backgrounds, i.e., having chemistry expertise, not speak out or make such a convincing case?

The reason is that what medical and biological experts describe (testing, isolation, RNA, proteins, pharmaceutical/vaccine development) are chemistry topics, not medical ones. Hence, their claims are mostly scientifically incorrect and invalid. Please visit my blog (link) describing how science/chemistry explains these aspects clearly, easily, and accurately.

The subject (my specialty) is analytical chemistry, a subdiscipline of the main subject.

Most often, four main subdisciplines of chemistry are taught at undergraduate levels. They are organic-, inorganic-, physical-, and bio-chemistry. Analytical chemistry is a separate sub-class that comes later and may be considered a specialization.

Often bio-chemistry is considered chemistry in medical/biological areas. However, unfortunately, biochemistry generally does not deal with the topics mentioned; hence cannot address the issues. It is more like part of the practice of medicine.

Not many study analytical chemistry in greater depth but use it as part of their subject. However, I happened to have studied this in detail. My M.Sc. and Ph.D. theses were in analytical chemistry.

Further, being part of Health Canada (30 years), I had to study several medical-related subjects such as pharmaceuticals, physiology, pharmacology, toxicology, statistics, clinical trials, and regulatory requirements and standards. This unique combination of training and expertise helps me see things from different perspectives, which is hard to see if one studies only the medical or chemistry (science) area. It also helps me write clearly, which would be difficult if one is unaware of this needed combination.

So, if anyone wants a second and scientifically valid opinion about viruses and virology, particularly medicines (chemicals), look for a trained analytical chemist with strong medical and biological knowledge.

Consider obtaining copies of my Helpful Notes and recent book, which explain the topics in detail.

In this interview, describing an important new book (Slaying the Virus and Vaccine Dragon), I explain why COVID-19 and its virus (SARS-COV-2) is not proven to exist. As such, no vaccine will treat a nonexistent pathogen. Furthermore, developing a vaccine for a non-existing virus is undoubtedly a medical/scientific fraud.

The explanation is in simple layman’s language, based on fundamental science (chemistry), mainly analytical chemistry. It covers the science of substances, isolation, identification, characterization, purification, tests developments, validation, and their uses.

The book shows how policymakers, a controlled media, and government ‘experts’ combined to scare us into history’s biggest medical hoax.

In 2020, I wrote an article (link) stating that drug dissolution testing is in decline. Checking it now (see the figure above) confirms that testing has declined significantly. For example, the reported number of dissolution-related publications is about half in 2022 compared to 2019 (the highest number reported). The trend appears to continue in 2023. This decline indicates hesitancy in using testing, most likely because of the irrelevancy and invalidity of drug dissolution results or data. Currently, dissolution testing is based on using non-validated testers. Not only should such testers be illegal to use, but any data obtained must be discarded as irrelevant.

While rejecting my Citizen Petition, FDA acknowledges (link) that these testers have not been independently validated. Therefore, technically and scientifically, these testers should not be part of any drug product evaluation.

There is a strong possibility that dissolution testers and their promoters will face the treatment as Theranos for using non-validated testers (link). When the time comes, the excuse that dissolution testers are only for compliance will be considered an inapt argument.

Dissolution testing is a critical step for product evaluation. However, it has to be conducted using testers that would provide efficient stirring and mixing and validated for the intended purpose, which is lacking. Therefore, people should start thinking about it before too late.

My Helpful Note provides help in addressing various issues and options in this regard.

Going through my earlier posts, I found some (early 2020) posts that may be helpful reads where I accurately predicted the fakeness of the virus, pandemic, and vaccine development. For example:

Is Coronavirus really causing abnormally higher number of deaths? (April 12, 2020), (link)

What is wrong with the following scenario? (May 7, 2020), (link)

Will therapeutics/vaccines be developed for COVID-19? Of course – but only fake ones! (May 31, 2020)
(link)

My views were based on the underlying science of medicine (medicines being chemicals). I wish authorities and experts would have considered my views that could have avoided the uncalled-for tragedy of colossal human suffering (health and financial).

With extreme distress and frustration, I say that authorities and experts, in ignorance, are still promoting false vaccination for an illness (or virus) that does not exist. Their claims were, and still are, based on fake or fraudulent “science.” It seems to have become an issue of ego and greed, not science, which requires urgent attention – time to dismantle and rebuild with science and logic.

Someone sent me a link to The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, describing the Scientific Advisory Committee, with detailed credentials of its members, which starts with the following introductory lines:

“Our Scientific Advisory Committee comprises a group of esteemed experts from outside of the foundation who offer a wide range of experiences and perspectives. This group plays an important role in strengthening our work by offering independent assessments of our Global Health Division strategies and helping us evaluate results.” (link)

Undoubtedly, the committee members’ credentials are extraordinarily high-ranking and probably unmatched worldwide in the medical and healthcare areas. Moreover, it is important to note that committee members excel and promote themselves concerning healthcare development and management. In addition, all have a medical degree such as MD, MBBS, or MBChB or related biological expertise as core competencies – relating to the practice of medicine.

Continue here

If one carefully reads the recently released FDA guidance/amendments (link), it should be clear that the vaccines lack scientific support for their relevance and need. The FDA has become an unprofessional and non-scientific organization.  

From the guidance, “Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration amended the emergency use authorizations (EUAs) of the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 bivalent mRNA vaccines to simplify the vaccination schedule for most individuals. This action includes authorizing the current bivalent vaccines (original and omicron BA.4/BA.5 strains) to be used for all doses administered to individuals 6 months of age and older, including for an additional dose or doses for certain populations. The monovalent Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines are no longer authorized for use in the United States.”

If the vaccines had been safe and effective, as claimed, their use would have changed from “authorized” to “approved.” Unfortunately, it is not the case. The vaccines’ fakeness was predicted, by the author, at the beginning of the pandemic, before their introduction, stating,

“Therefore, a fake vaccine will most likely be developed to satisfy the regulatory wish and calm down the created public hysteria and fear. Unfortunately, such vaccines, if developed and administered, will undoubtedly create potentially dangerous side effects, without any presumed benefits, by interfering with the body’s immune system and other related physiological processes.” (link)

Therefore, indirectly, FDA acknowledges that the vaccines did not work, hence discontinued, without disclosing the safety and efficacy data from clinical trials, which was expected soon, as reported earlier [“estimated study completion date” of Jan. 31, 2023,” see link here and here].

However, a bigger mystery is why they have suggested an alternative version of the vaccine without any supported clinical trial or testing when in their view pandemic is over and most people are showing immunity against the virus and its variants.

Furthermore, the FDA announcement states, “Most UNVACCINATED individuals MAY RECEIVE a single dose of a bivalent vaccine, rather than multiple doses of the original monovalent mRNA vaccines.” So it appears that the vaccine is not recommended or mandated but a suggestion. That is interesting.

It could be argued that FDA realizes that the new suggested version also does not have the needed safety and efficacy support; hence, its vaccine recommendation could only be implemented with the EUA. Therefore, the FDA AMENDS the EUA, rationalizing EUA without the emergency (link). It is bizarre! How can they claim to be a science-based organization caring for the public’s health? 

Unfortunately, this change/update has to be made because the usual standards for product approval for the vaccines/drugs could not be met.

Certainly, it would further damage the FDA and the medical profession’s already significantly lost credibility as an unbiased evaluator of medicines. FDA seems to have placed itself in a difficult position, perhaps more accurately, on its deathbed with a few remaining gasps for air.

This is one of the better presentations (Link)I have watched concerning the marketing of the COVID-19  vaccine, indicating the involvement of a foreign country. It is pretty scary. It is worth watching.

However, my main concern is her (Dr. Wolf’s) reliance on technical/scientific data interpretation by the (medical) experts, which is unfortunately inaccurate.

She talked about the spike protein (distribution, metabolism, and excretion) at the beginning (around 12 min) of her presentation. Unfortunately, this is how medical experts understand and describe it, but this is not scientifically correct. There cannot be a virus spike protein available or present. No one has a specimen of it as it can only be obtained from the COVID-19 virus, which no one has isolated.

That is why it is so difficult to decipher the fraud because, most of the time, people assume that medical experts know the science behind viruses and vaccines. This is, unfortunately, not true. Virology (virus isolation, identification) and the mRNA, spike protein, and vaccine can only be understood appropriately with a strong chemistry/science background. The experts lack knowledge and training in the relevant science. Hence, they were fooled, and it is impossible to get out of by using the same approach that created the situation. For example, scientifically, it was very clear from the start that:

1. There is no virus. Therefore, there can’t be an associated RNA or spike protein available.
2. Without the availability of the virus, RNA, or spike protein, developing a test or detecting them is impossible. Therefore, there cannot be COVID-19. Period!
3. As no virus specimen is available, developing an appropriate valid vaccine or any other treatment is impossible. Indeed, vaccines have been developed without testing in COVID-19 patients, as no patients were available.
4. Science/chemistry clearly described the authorities’ inappropriate and invalid assessment of the mRNA vaccine before their introduction.

All have been described clearly and extensively based on well-established scientific/chemical principles here (Helpful Notes) and are now summarised and explained in a recently published book. Please have a look.

Further details

COVID-19: The virus does not exist – it is confirmed! (link)

(Video) Virus, COVID, pandemic, vaccine, and testing: fiction, not reality or science! (link)

COVID-19: Open letter to physicians, pharmacists, and laboratory managers (link) And much more here

There have been a few debates between virus and non-virus camps concerning the virus’s (SARS-COV-2) existence and its isolation. However, a clear consensus (winners/losers) is lacking, but both parties claim to win. Why is it so? However, one thing is clear dodgy and fake science is certainly getting exposed.

The virus camp, which takes a judge’s role, does not debate but forces its understanding of virology, notably about the isolation and existence of the virus. For example: (Continue here)

I responded to a question received through email. Considering my response would be helpful to this site’s visitors, I am also sharing it here.

Concerning your question, “I wasn’t able to find material there to help me with the questions related to the subject of what happened to the flu.”

It is difficult, if not impossible, to give a definite answer to the question because of the lack of data and reference standards (flu virus) and then the funny “science” at the authorities, like the CDC and FDA. However, below I provide you with the most likely scenario for the disappearance of the flu (e.g., see here link, link).

Everything associated with a virus is based on PCR testing. However, by definition, these tests are scientifically invalid or false. This is because the tests never detect any virus, but a small fragment supposedly from the virus RNA. However, these fragments could be from many other sources, such as healthy body cell degradation, bacteria, the food we consume, the test itself (e.g., choice of test threshold cycles), etc. Therefore, such tests can mostly give false positives/negatives.

Another reason, not commonly understood or described, for the test results’ fakeness is the primer choice. The outcome of test results depends on the choice of a primer. In a simple analogy, one may consider a primer as a “bait” to selectively seek a pre-defined target (the RNA fragment).

Therefore, if one likes to see or ignore a particular “virus,” one can add or remove a particular primer. For example, after the COVID-19 vaccination, when it did not work, presumably, they changed the primer to detect a different “version” of the virus. They called it variants like delta, omicron, etc., described with the mutation narrative. It is just one of the tricks they play with.

Concerning the flu, it is quite possible that either they changed the primer or, more likely, got busy with COVID-19 primer or testing. More likely, the chosen primer overlapped with the flu one and was not recorded as flu. This made the flu disappear. However, the flu may reappear shortly when the primer is switched (labeled) back with the old or new primer.

Virus testing is a selective exercise depending on a particular primer used. That is why, as some said, jokingly how intelligent the viruses or variants are; they come only one at a time. It is just because desire (policy) of the authorities as to what they like us (the public) to see and when, and then throw a specific primer (for an imaginary virus or variant) into it, and voila, that “virus” or RNA starts appearing in the population (e.g., see here link, link). Welcome to modern illness “identifications” and their treatment development!

In short, no virus is/was out there, even for the flu. However, authorities and experts most likely selectively ignore primer and/or count it with the COVID-19 primer.

I hope this will help.