Category: Science

From FB (link, ref. @Jason Pickels)

I agree with your undecidedness or perhaps confusion. The reason is that most narratives in the medical area (“science”) are based on biology, which is mistakenly considered science. In this regard, most claims are opinions or, at best, observations (social surveys), not scientific. Hence, people, in general, are suffering from “illnesses” because of misdiagnoses and mistreatments.

Vaccines and vaccinations are false treatments because they are treatments for viruses (a biological opinion or guess) that have not been shown to exist. So, treatment is not treating anything but ends up resulting in poor health because of side effects, in some cases extremely bad.

On the other hand, believing and promoting that germs are “friendly” and do not or cannot cause harm is also a biological opinion or guess, and not treating it as such is also a misdiagnosis leading to bad health and possibly death.

There is hope that these misdiagnoses could be addressed using actual science/chemistry, as the body is based on chemical molecules and reactions, physiology).

So, please do not be carried away with opinions and guesses; focus on actual science/chemistry and seek help from those who know actual science/chemistry. I do not pretend that learning and understanding science/chemistry will be easy. It is a challenging subject but doable with time and effort.

I have been writing about this topic for some time now. You can get help from my writing. If you have questions or require clarifications, I will happily address them as time allows.

Best of luck.

https://bioanalyticx.com/what-is-science-and-who-are-scientists/

Why Do People Get Sick – A View! (Part 2)

https://bioanalyticx.com/my-training-and-expertise-people-ask/

https://bioanalyticx.com/biology-virology-immunology-medical-science-etc-cannot-be-considered-science-subjects/


From FB (link, re: Caroline Oakshett)

I appreciate your valuable thoughts and input.

I understand there is great skepticism about the political leadership’s honesty in dealing with the vaccine issues. Perhaps you may be correct that there may be a smoke screen without anything genuine or honest happening.

This time, however, I sense something is different. In the past, such claims were dominated mainly by medical experts (physicians). It seems the role of medical experts is diminished.

Two names that are mentioned for the upcoming administration in the health area are RFK Jr. and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

Although Dr. Bhattacharya has training in medicine (M.D.), his main expertise is in economics and management.

“Jayanta Bhattacharya (born 1968) is an American physician-scientist and economist who is a professor of medicine, economics, and health research policy at Stanford University. He is the director of Stanford’s Center for Demography and Economics of Health and Aging. His research focuses on the economics of health care.” (link).

I consider them both outsiders of the medical field and more towards the business or management side, implying trust in medical experts has diminished in the government. Similarly, Elon Musk is an outsider to healthcare and would probably assist them with his business/management acumen.

I also think that, in general, the public and probably the leadership have lost the trust in medical experts (physicians), knowing, as I often emphasize, that they lied about their credentials and expertise in conducting scientific research. They never studied and trained in science but present themselves as “followers of science” or science experts (scientists) in conducting laboratory-based scientific research. I doubt they will ever recover from the damage of their false claim.

Given this background, I like to be hopeful that there will be a good shakeup of the medical-pharmaceutical complex for the better this time.

Time will tell, and I am hopeful.

About an article by David Marks,  “The Truth About RFK Jr. and the Samoan Measles Outbreak” (link)

@ “When the U.S. Government assures the public that any vaccine or medication is safe and effective, this must come from an independent, thorough and transparent process, rather than relying only on the words and actions of those with vested interests.”

Exactly! This is what I have been saying.

The assurance must come from the actual science/chemistry experts (scientists), not from medical science experts, who do not have education, experience, or expertise in science – the science of isolation, purification, and characterization of substances/particles, in addition to developing, manufacturing, and testing chemicals (medicines, including vaccines).

Currently, no valid scientific evidence is available for viruses’ existence and/or the relevancy and efficacy of vaccines.

Dear RFK Jr., please seek help from actual science/chemistry experts (scientists)  to address the science issue in the vaccines/medicines area.

Science Fraud in Medicines –  Vast Majority Does Not Know (link)
My training and expertise – people ask! (link)
What is science, and who are scientists? (link)

Obtaining a specific degree or studying a subject for a limited time may not make one a scientist. For example, a chemistry degree alone would not make a person a scientist. I am often referred to as a chemist as I have chemistry degrees. However, I do not consider it a correct or proper title for me.

I worked with Health Canada for 30 years with the official title of Research Scientist or Scientist, not a chemist, even though there was a separate designation (with a separate pay scale and significantly lower compensation than the scientists’ category) for chemists, where people work with having various levels of chemistry educations. So, having a degree alone would not make anyone a scientist. This practice is not only in Health Canada but also valid in other places, including FDA.

The chemistry degree is a science degree, but it makes you a chemist, i.e., to perform well-understood and established routines and principles of chemistry for a given job. Chemists follow relatively rigid rules and instructions regarding chemistry operations.

On the other hand, in my case, having degrees with a specialization in chemistry as a scientist, I was free to pursue the study of natural or biological processes, mainly those that fall under departmental mandates. I have no set limitations to follow when adhering to a particular subject.

For example, I did projects relating to drug (chemicals) absorption (natural processes) in humans and various animal species. I knew chemicals/chemistry but had to learn several other subjects and techniques to conduct such a study. I was trying to understand the natural process, not doing chemistry based on some set rules, but to know how chemicals/drugs work or behave in the body. Hence, I consider myself a scientist, not a chemist.

When I started this project, I had 12 years of academic training in science/chemistry and almost 10 years of working experience in a science capacity. So, I believe this would require someone to be considered a scientist.

The following was posted as a comment on an FB discussion (link).  

The comment responded to is at the end.  

Chris, your point is well taken. You acknowledge that biology/virology/immunology make assumptions and assertions arguably exaggerated, making their work of questionable merit.

However, Steve is trying to highlight different aspects which you are missing. Take, for example, your comment,

“[They] have a wealth of data programmed into their heads. They’ve mastered techniques to interact with materials in laboratory situations and know a lot about computer number crunching. They can recite physiological pathways and have images of cell structures …”

Agreed; they do all these things. But the question is, will it make them science experts or scientists? No, they would be biologists, virologists, and immunologists, but NOT scientists. This is the confusion people have that if someone does a lot of lab work, crunches numbers, and writes reports/publications, they become science experts or scientists.

(more…)

Blog Article: Fake And False Science Of Illnesses And Diagnoses (link). FB (link). For convenience, questions are copied below the response.

Response:

@ “… is vacciantion build on the simmilar principle as homeopathy / administering a small doses of alleged poison to treat the illness/”

I have some knowledge and personal experience with homeopathy. Based on this, I would say that they are not similar. To me, they are as similar to comparing electric and gas-powered vehicles because they both require a (small) battery or electric power to start the car. So, they both could be considered electric-powered. However, they are very different in operation – there is no comparison.

Concerning “small doses/amount of alleged poison,” I do not think homeopathy injects poison. On the other hand, I am certain, based on what is available in the literature about vaccines, that they are not in small amounts (compared to homeopathic doses) but certainly significantly large amounts of filth/gunk (potentially poison). I would not suggest anyone take it, considering the science/chemistry aspect of it.

(more…)

Currently, two views are commonly used to explain illnesses. One is that people get sick by the presence/infection of some invisible particles (viruses). Second, illness reflects the body’s detoxification process to eliminate toxins. Doctors and health experts often promote and support both views, implied as science-based.

Note that these are opinions or narratives presented as theories to sound factual and scientific. However, these theories are not supported by actual science. Both viruses and toxins (cell debris) are imaginary and fictional objects/substances. No scientific evidence supports the presence or existence of such entities and their relevance.

The only way to make such a claim scientifically valid and acceptable is that the so-called viruses or the toxins must be isolated, purified, and fully (physically and chemically) characterized, and these must be available as such in vials or test tubes. Nothing of this sort happens or is available. Hence, all these claims are scientifically baseless.

Use caution when considering doctors’ (medical and health experts’) science as actual science. There is no medical/health science. It is a made-up science (fake and false) based on personal opinions and narratives.

A better alternative to understanding and addressing illnesses is to try to understand the body’s chemistry, i.e., the working of chemicals (in and outside the body). It is essential to note that the body is built on chemicals (fats, proteins, sugars, minerals, vitamins, water, oxygen, etc), and these are supplied by food and the environment. An imbalance of these can result in issues (called illnesses) and should easily be addressed by appropriate testing and adjusting chemical imbalances. Please consider studying the science of chemicals (chemistry) or seek help from science/chemistry experts.  

What is science, and who are scientists? (link)

An M.D. degree is not a science degree! (link)

“Trump says RFK Jr. will investigate discredited link between vaccines and autism.” (link).

From a scientific perspective, it is much better to investigate if vaccine use is valid, justified, or beneficial.

One should remember that vaccines are promoted as a treatment against viruses and/or their infections/illnesses. However, the issue is that viruses have not been shown to exist, so there cannot be their illnesses. Therefore, vaccines cannot be (or have not) been tested against viruses or their illnesses. Hence, vaccines are useless medicines/treatments but cause numerous severe side effects. As an example, consider the recent claim of virus (COVID-19) illness/infection/pandemic (all fake) and its fake (vaccine) development and treatment, resulting in numerous side effects, along with enormous financial/economic damage.

The issue needs to be examined from the scientific perspective, seeking input/help from experts in science/chemistry, as medicines, including vaccines, are chemicals. Unfortunately, it has been dealt with by non-science experts such as physicians or medical experts.

For further reading:

COVID-19: The virus does not exist – it is confirmed! (link)
Vaccines efficacy (link)
The FDA Committee’s Review of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine: Unscientific, False and Deceitful (link).
France Identifies 53 Unique COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals (link).
An M.D. degree is not a science degree! (link)
Comments on the article “Do Viruses Exist?” by Michael Palmer, M.D. and Sucharit Bhakdi, M.D. (link).
Dr. Marty Makary’s YouTube Video (link)
What is science, and who are scientists? (link).

“An Extraordinary Step’: White House Mulls ‘Preemptive’ Pardon for Fauci” (link)

One thing is clear: fraudulent activities have occurred, as has been pointed out repeatedly through my blog (link) and the Book “Slaying the Virus and Vaccine Dragon” (link). For example, (1) False and fraudulent story of the existence of the COVID-19 virus (and others); (2) Use and promotion of fraudulent testing (PCR, Antigen, etc.); (3) Development of vaccines and declaring their efficacy without testing them against the virus, infection and or its patients.

The other most critical aspect is that physicians and medical experts, internal and external to governments worldwide, claim to be science experts (scientists) when their training and education are based only on a non-science undergraduate degree.

https://bioanalyticx.com/an-m-d-degree-is-not-a-science-degree/
https://bioanalyticx.com/dr-marty-makarys-youtube-video/
https://bioanalyticx.com/52-top-leading-eminent-scientists-how-and-why/