Category: Testing

Post Views: 13
medicine, healthcare and pharmacy concept – different pills and capsules of drugs

A drug dissolution test is a test used to establish the quality of a pharmaceutical product, such as a tablet or capsule. This test is conducted because the drug (often called active ingredient) needs to be released from the product for its absorption into the blood to elicit its therapeutic effect.

The test is conducted in place of a clinical test/study called bioavailability or bioequivalence, a pharmacology/pharmacokinetic study type. The test is the backbone of quality assessment of all tablet and capsule products. It is a requirement of worldwide authorities, including the FDA, Health Canada, etc., and pharmacopeias such as USP, BP, EP, etc.

(more…)
Post Views: 6

I commented on a post (link**) you may find helpful.

Thanks again, Steve Bashir, for your comment. I wish more people had the same approach and thinking as yours – not a follower or cult member, but a listener and open-minded to learn and understand the topic. It will not only help me explain things but will encourage my science/chemistry fellows to come forward to explain how much science has been distorted and messed up in medical and pharmaceutical areas. I will happily help anyone interested in learning about the relevant science aspects. I have significant relevant experience in the field. Continue (here)

Post Views: 5

Article: “Even When It Came to Children, German Government Ignored Own Scientists to Impose Strict COVID Vaccine, Mask Mandates” (link).

I scanned through the article because of the word “scientists” in the title. However, there is no science or scientists in the article, except the views of some who claim to be scientists (I believe self-declared) and their narratives (surveys/observations).

I would like to emphasize that someone with a Ph.D. in a subject does not qualify as a scientist. The person may be considered an expert in that subject. For example, someone with a Ph.D. in biology or medicine may be regarded as an expert in biology or medicine practice (prescription write-ups) – not science. Similarly, adding the word “science” in a subject, e.g., political science, computer science, health science, etc., would not make these subjects science subjects or people having expertise scientists. It is incorrect, and such labeling should be avoided. It causes enormous problems (e.g., false claims of illnesses and their treatments) and gives a very bad name to actual science, its work, and scientists.

In a true sense, science subjects include physics, chemistry, and/or mathematics, working at fundamental/basic levels with extensive and exhaustive hands-on experience in laboratories with physically existing substances.

Fake and false science produced fake and false outputs, such as viruses, tests/testing, pandemics, and vaccines. Actual science has played no role in such narratives/discoveries. In fact, science/chemistry accurately described their nonexistence and irrelevancies.

Please use caution when reading the words science and scientists, particularly in modern medicine and its literature. They are all fake and false—there are no science or scientists.

  • Doctors’ Science Requires Audit and Accountability (link)
  • What is science, and who are scientists? (link)
Post Views: 5

In a major ruling, the Supreme Court sharply reduced the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretation. (link.)

The court overruled its landmark 1984 decision, which gave rise to the doctrine known as the Chevron doctrine. Under that doctrine, if Congress has not directly addressed the question at the center of a dispute, a court was required to uphold the Agency’s interpretation of the statute as long as it was reasonable. In a 35-page ruling by Chief Justice John Roberts, the justices rejected that doctrine, calling it “fundamentally misguided.” Continue here

Post Views: 7

First, people should understand the difference between medicines and medicinal products. It’s critical, and many/most, including doctors, may not know it.

A medicine is mostly a pure chemical (powder or liquid). On the other hand, the medicinal product is a package, e.g., tablets (pills), capsules, suspensions, syrups, ointments, etc. These “packages” are to deliver medications to the body conveniently. It is just like juice or milk in cartons. The actual or needed substance is the juice or milk, and a carton or package delivers/transfers its content, then goes to waste.

Many (non-active or non-medicinal) components are mixed and/or compressed with actual medicines to develop these packages (e.g., tablets). Once someone takes the tablet (package) orally, the actual drug/medicine comes out of it and gets absorbed, and the rest is a waste and is supposed to come out of the body unaltered and without causing any harm.

However, if one takes the drug/medicines, say acetaminophen for Tylenol as a powder in an equivalent amount and mix with some water and drinks it, they will have their dose of medicine. They may act faster than their packaged versions, as they do not get to dissolve in the body as they are pre-dissolved.

Very important—medicines/drugs obtained from chemical suppliers (chemists) will be genuine and have much better assurance of quality and purity as they are certified against authentic (reference) standards.

On the other hand, drug products are only available from pharmaceutical manufacturing or pharmacies (a twisted version of chemical manufacturing), without any testing against (reference) standards, only based on a claim that they are approved by FDA/CDC/USP (the pharmaceutical equivalent of CDC) and other regulatory agencies, but NOT tested against any authentic (scientific) standard—not many know this. 

A chemical manufacturer should also manufacture drug products. Chemical manufacturing is purely mixing chemicals/molecules (often very simple molecules using simple processes). In that case, the products will be of higher quality and far cheaper than their “pharmaceutical” version—and with the science behind them.

In short, a direct from (chemical/medicine) manufacturers to consumers/patients may be practiced. It would be a superior approach, eliminating the involvement of others, especially those having no training and expertise in science/chemistry.  

Post Views: 38

The article (link) that was brought to my attention describes the views of two prominent doctors on the virus and the COVID-19 aspects, notably their isolation and characterization.

In short, there is nothing new here. It is just repeating false claims about the virus and its isolation. It is clear that the authors do not understand the underlying science, thus making numerous invalid and false claims. For example:

Continue here

Post Views: 72

Different doctors suggest different chemicals (cleverly named as medicines/treatments), such as mRNA vaccine, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, etc., to address the issue (symptoms/infections) of COVID-19. The claims of the effectiveness of these chemicals are based on studies (implying “scientific or experimental studies”) often published in “scientific” journals. However, from critical and logical considerations, these studies and claims are not scientific – as no virus or infection is available for testing or developing treatments. Testing a virus or its infection requires a valid test that is unavailable and cannot be developed until a physical virus sample is available [1]. Hence, all claims of testing, viruses, or treatments are scientifically fake and false.

(more…)