Category: Testing

Post Views: 5

Someone asked how to address the issues with medicines and related medical (doctors’) sciences.

I suggest moving the chemicals-based (allopathic) medicines away from doctors and pharmacists, including all testing (diagnostic or otherwise). They are doing chemists’ work without relevant training and education, making disastrous blunders and ruining people’s health. The subject has to be managed by appropriately educated and experienced scientists/chemists. All development, manufacturing, testing, approval, and marketing of medicines/chemicals must be guided by chemistry experts.

Doctors should provide the service they are trained for, i.e., they should provide standardized prescriptions by observing symptoms and clinical test results. They should not claim to be science experts or scientists or be involved in scientific (experimental) research.

Further information link, link, and more

Post Views: 6

I commented on an article. I think the comment would also be helpful to the visitors of this blog.

@ “They are science, as best as I know it.” How? (link)

The question is which science is being followed here – presumably epidemiology. Epidemiology is “the branch of medicine which deals with the incidence, distribution, and possible control of diseases and other factors relating to health.” (link)

It means it is part of medicine. Sorry to say it, but science is not part of the training or learning of medicines. For example, an M.D. (Doctor of Medicine) is a standard non-science undergraduate degree. Therefore, epidemiology should not be considered a science subject or part of it. (link).

In general, epidemiology depends on the interpretation and/or outcome of diagnosis/testing from the medical area. For example, in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, the whole story revolves around PCR testing, which by any standard is a fake and fraudulent test, i.e., it has no link to the virus (SARS-COV-2), illness (COVID-19) or mRNA (vaccine development). Hence, all interpretations, including those by epidemiology, will be presumptions or opinion-based, not scientific or factual.

The actual science of medicine is chemistry, particularly analytical chemistry (link). Please consider this.

Post Views: 2

A medical degree such as an M.D. (Doctor of Medicine) is a standard undergraduate non-science degree without any training in experimental/laboratory science or research in medicines (chemicals). The science and research aspect must be conducted under the guidance of experts in chemical science (chemistry) to be valid. From a scientific perspective, the virus, virology, pandemic, (PCR) tests, and vaccines (all are chemical-based) can easily and quickly be established as fake and fraudulent.

  1. The science behind COVID and vaccines! (link).
  2. COVID and science divergence (link).
  3. (Video) Virus, COVID, pandemic, vaccine, and testing: fiction, not reality or science! (link).
  4. COVID-19: Open letter to physicians, pharmacists, and laboratory managers (link).
  5. Missing Science From Viruses, Vaccines And Medical/Pharmaceutical Practices (link).
  6. What is science, and who are scientists? (link).
  7. And more (link).
Post Views: 6

People will not believe it, but it is true and a fact that universities hardly teach about medicines and science for a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) degree.

More astonishing is that academia promotes doctors as (medicine/chemical) science experts or “scientists” without teaching them about the science of medicine (chemistry). No wonder the mRNA vaccine resulted in such a disastrous blunder and an extreme tragedy. It is a tragedy of ignorance and incompetence.

A doctor’s role as a science expert or researcher must be stopped immediately, as it is a fraud. Doctors should only practice what they are trained to do, i.e., hearing/watching the symptoms, seeking relevant test results, and then writing up matching prescriptions from memory or through Google.

Medical professionals are among the least educated and knowledgeable about science. Prove me wrong!

More (here, here, here, and more)

Post Views: 3

Two days ago, I posted a link to a Substack article on FB (link), which missed or ignored an important contribution (mine). I do not understand why people felt hurt or angry with the post and comments. See for yourself. Mike Stone (ViroLIEgy fame) even started a separate Thread citing some comments (link).

I wondered what happened and what might have caused such trashy behavior and outbursts by some in the “group.”

It appears that it could be the outcome of a post by Linda (on TG), a simple and short comment supporting my views, which the group could not handle, even though she emphasizes that my views do not contradict those mentioned by non-virus camp.

So, why is so much anger against me and my views? It’s hard to know, except they are sensitive to their false claim, narrative, or science. Is it?

You be the judge. I would appreciate your thoughts on it, if possible, as to why so much anger and bad-mouthing against me.

Thanks to Linda and so many others who read my articles and provided appreciation and support. Thanks again from the bottom of my heart. God bless you all!

Post Views: 13

When people, including “experts,” describe science, they usually mean “medical science,” which is a nonexistent or imaginary thing like viruses, but imply they are referring to actual science (chemistry, physics, and mathematics, mainly chemistry). Generally, they cannot talk directly about the actual science because they have not studied or practiced it significantly. In most cases, they lack understanding, even at the basic level.

So, when reading articles and comments about science from such “expert” or their “research,” make sure to know which science is referred to, the fake one (like medicine, virology, etc) or the actual one.

There is hardly any critique from knowledgeable people about the well-established and well-understood principles and practices of the actual science.

Viruses, variants, PCR testing, sequencing, RNA, mRNA, spike protein, vaccines, gain of function research, etc., are all fake science inventions. They can ONLY be resolved, and quickly, by applying the well-understood and well-established principles and techniques of actual science.

Fake science and its promoters are confusing and hindering resolving the issues – be cautious and seek help from actual science experts or scientists (link).

Post Views: 8

Last night, as an unpaid subscriber, I received an email from Dr. Meryl Nass Substack titled “The “No Viruses exist” cult has been out in force lately.”  (link)

After reading it, I am confused about whether to cry with the absurd logic presented or laugh at the arguments (hilarious science). I could not decide, so in my frustration, I am leaving it to you to decide – my thoughts or questions are highlighted in bold.

@ “I told Christine Massey over and over that her FOIAs were answered by all countries in the same manner because a) the countries lie about everything related to COVID, …” So, why is it difficult to accept that they lied about the virus existence as well?

@ “These people want everything to be isolated the way they decide it should be isolated.” No, the question is where this (the virus) has been isolated as claimed. The result of an isolation step is an isolated item, in this case, the virus – where is it?

@ “Some things require indirect measurements.” True, but those things have to exist first. Where is that thing (the virus)? Please provide (scientific) evidence of its existence. Moreover, the measuring instrument must be calibrated/validated independently to show that it can measure lengths or distances. Where is the (“indirect”) test/method independently calibrated/validated to measure the viruses? There is none, and it is a fact.

@ “But here is the kicker. Have none of these pseudo-scientists ever had a cold? Have they never had flu? No cold sores? No genital herpes? No warts? All these are due to viruses.” That is the question. How have these observations been linked to the viruses? Where are these viruses? Who has them (samples or specimens of the isolated viruses)?

Please bring these questions/thoughts to Dr. Meryl Nass’s attention. (Substack link)