Category: Vaccine

Articles such as the one published by MedPage Today rely heavily on the repeated assertion that “medical experts” and “scientists” have settled the questions surrounding viruses and vaccines. That assertion itself deserves scrutiny—because it is foundationally flawed (link).

If I were sitting next to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., I would urge him to request Congress to examine a far more fundamental issue than any individual policy dispute: the systematic misrepresentation of medical credentials as scientific credentials.

Medical practice is not a science in the strict sense.

(more…)

In a recent podcast, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made the following observation:

“At CMS, the Trump Administration recently published the Transparency and Coverage 2.0 proposed rule. It requires health insurers to show patients the actual cost of care upfront, so you can see the cost before you receive it.”

It is worth watching (2:41 minutes, link). I consider this a genuine turning point. Price transparency in medical care is a good start.

The move toward price transparency in healthcare—allowing patients to know costs upfront and compare options—is genuinely good news. It is long overdue and clearly points in the right direction. I have been thinking about this issue for years, particularly with respect to drug pricing, but often hesitated to raise it because it exposes uncomfortable truths and invites predictable resistance.

Still, the logic cannot be ignored.

(more…)


Science has led medicine and biology, not the other way around. Only now—after widespread and serious adverse outcomes associated with mRNA vaccines have become difficult to ignore—are some medical experts beginning to concede that medical practice lagged behind genuine science. This acknowledgment comes years too late.

These failures were not unforeseeable. Based on formal education and professional expertise in chemistry, the methodological flaws and risks were evident from the outset. They were explicitly predicted in 2020, before the development, authorization, and mass administration of these products (vaccines) —at a time when dissenting scientific voices were dismissed, censored, or ridiculed.

As stated in 2020:

(more…)

Today’s environment is defined by confusion. It has become increasingly difficult to determine whether people are being dishonest or simply uninformed. Public trust in leadership has collapsed. Citizens were misled so often that even an honest leader—if one appears—will be met with suspicion. This situation harms both the public and the leadership trying to serve them.

RFK Jr. stands out as someone who appears genuinely motivated. Yet he remains trapped by his deep trust in “the experts.” Like most people, he assumes that physicians in positions of authority—especially those within the CDC, NIH, and FDA—are real scientists conducting or have conducted real scientific research.

This assumption is fundamentally wrong.

His information comes almost exclusively from physicians or biology experts, who confidently repeat claims about “science” that have never been scientifically verified. However, whenever he investigates an issue logically, he finds the same pattern: conflicts of interest, hidden data, contradictory statements, and conclusions with no scientific foundation. He attempts to address these problems, but a complete cleanup is impossible without proper scientific support. And he cannot obtain that support because he keeps returning to the same group—the very physicians whose claims require auditing.

This is why confusion, mistrust, and contradiction persist.

The advice to RFK Jr.—and to anyone facing the same dilemma—is straightforward:

Do not rely on physicians for scientific answers. They are not trained scientists. Rely on chemists and true experimental scientists who can verify claims with real evidence.

A single scientific question would expose the entire system:

Where is the data showing that vaccines were tested against real, isolated viruses and validated illnesses?

Once that question is asked, the discussion ends.

There is no such data.
No isolated viral samples.
No validated illness models.
No scientific evidence establishes vaccine efficacy.

If this evidence does not exist, why are vaccines being injected into people, including children?
There is no scientific answer—because the science itself is missing.

The problem is not the medicine; the problem is the false science presented as the basis for the medicine.

The same question should be put to Dr. Malone. He will likely offer a “sophisticated” explanation of how things are done “scientifically,” but it would be based on assumptions about science rather than on true scientific principles. His framework originates from narrative and procedure, rather than from chemistry, the actual foundation of science.

And in this context, the relevant discipline is analytical chemistry, not biology, not biochemistry, and certainly not medical “science.” This distinction is critical.

The claims made by virologists, immunologists, and medical experts collapse the moment a true scientist—a chemist—examines them. What they call “science” is in reality a ritual of procedures, declarations, and institutional authority—not empirical truth.

Only when leaders seek guidance from genuine scientists will this confusion end.


What is science, and who are scientists? (link)
A Simple And Direct Question RFK Jr Needs To Ask – A Suggestion (link)

Much criticism has been directed at my definition of science: the study of physically existing substances, investigated using well-established principles of physics and chemistry at the atomic and molecular level (link). This definition is often portrayed as narrow or outdated. In reality, it is the classical definition of science that has guided human understanding for centuries and has delivered extraordinary, reproducible results. It is this framework that built modern technology, materials science, engineering, and chemistry-based medicine—fields that consistently produce high-yield, verifiable outcomes and command enduring respect for their practitioners.

(more…)

In response to my Facebook Post, a suggestion that Rockefeller or its foundation decided that a physician should be considered a scientist or science expert, I asked ChatGPT to address the question directly. The response is presented below. I consider it accurate, and aligns with my long-standing understanding that medicine largely self-proclaimed itself as “science-based” and its practitioners as “scientists,” without meeting the foundational standards of science.

Do you agree? Please comment. Thanks.

(more…)

Once again, the central point is this: viruses have not been shown to exist in a scientifically rigorous manner.

People often respond to this statement—sometimes politely, sometimes harshly—by accusing me of ignorance or denial, insisting that viruses “obviously exist” and have been “clearly shown” in photographs. This reaction is not due to stubbornness or misunderstanding on my part; rather, it reflects a widespread lack of understanding of what those photographs actually represent.

Images commonly presented by authoritative institutions, including the CDC (see below), are not photographs of isolated viruses. They are images of cell cultures—complex laboratory mixtures described as environments in which viruses are claimed to be “grown” or “produced.” Within these images, certain structures—often small dots or particles—are labeled as viruses. However, labeling is not evidence. These structures are assumed to be viruses; they are not scientifically demonstrated to be viruses.

(more…)

The article “The Five Big Lies of Vaccinology” presents itself as a scientific critique of vaccines—particularly mRNA products—by analyzing Pfizer trial data (link). However, this review is authored from a medical, not a scientific, perspective. This distinction is not semantic; it is fundamental.

In fact, the five lies of vaccinology are themselves the result of one larger and more consequential lie: that medical science is science, and that physicians are scientists.

The central problem with vaccines and vaccinology is therefore not merely flawed trials, exaggerated claims, or regulatory misconduct. Those issues are secondary. The primary problem is that modern medicine is not grounded in true science. Medical professionals—whether arguing for or against vaccines—are not educated or trained in the foundational sciences required to make scientific determinations: chemistry, physics, and mathematics.

As a result, both pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine medical arguments suffer from the same structural defect. They rely on assumptions inherited from medical doctrine rather than on independently established scientific evidence.

The Unexamined Premise: Virus Existence

The article critiques vaccinology while preserving its most critical assumption: that viruses exist as isolated, purified, and scientifically characterized entities. This assumption is never questioned. Yet from a true scientific perspective, this is precisely where scrutiny must begin.

There is no scientifically valid evidence demonstrating the isolation, purification, and characterization of viruses in accordance with the standards required by chemistry and physics (science). Without such evidence, the entire framework of virology—including disease attribution, pathogenic mechanisms, and vaccine targets—rests on an unverified premise.

If the causal agent itself has not been scientifically established, then:

  • Claims of virus-specific diseases are unsubstantiated.
  • Pathology attributed to viruses is speculative.
  • Preventive or therapeutic interventions—vaccines included—are scientifically unjustified.

Under these conditions, debating vaccine safety, efficacy, or platform technology (including mRNA) is misplaced. There is no scientific necessity for vaccines to exist in the first place.

Medical Debate Is Not Scientific Debate

The article reflects an internal dispute within medicine, not a scientific evaluation of medicine itself. Medical experts reviewing medical studies—even critically—remain confined to a non-scientific framework. Statistical analysis of clinical trials does not substitute for establishing the physical reality of the entities being claimed.

This is why such reviews, while appearing rigorous, ultimately reinforce the same foundational error: they challenge vaccine implementation while leaving the existence of viruses—and thus virology itself—unexamined and implicitly validated.

Conclusion

The failure of vaccinology is not isolated. As even the article indirectly illustrates, it is part of a broader pattern. It is the consequence of medicine presenting itself as science when it is not, and of physicians being portrayed as scientists when they are not trained as such.

Until medicine is grounded in true scientific methodology—beginning with the physical isolation, purification, and characterization of claimed agents—both pro- and anti-vaccine arguments remain scientifically incomplete.

A genuine scientific critique must challenge first principles, not merely debate outcomes.

The Medical Shell Game: The Illusion of Science (link)

LINK

Many so-called “awake” doctors speak out against vaccines, but usually after the harm has already been done and continues to be done.

Vaccines were being developed right under their noses for years, and concerns about harm were repeatedly raised — yet these doctors never acted meaningfully or effectively.

Why? Because they still do not understand where the real problem lies.

The core issue is this: doctors claim they are conducting “science” and “scientific research,” including for vaccine development, but this is a false claim. Physicians — including specialists — do not have education, training, or credentials in true science. They are not scientists. Their entire system is built on a self-declared brand called “medical science,” which produces diagnoses, tests, treatments, and pharmaceuticals — including vaccines.

None of this is grounded in true science. It belongs in the domain of chemistry, where isolation, purification, and characterization must be performed for diagnosis, testing, and product development. These “awake” doctors simply assume those steps were done. They never verify them because they do not have the education and training to do so.

Thus, even their criticisms remain shallow. They talk about side effects and mandates — but never question the core claim: Was there ever a virus? Most cannot even define a pure, isolated virus sample.

The truth is simple: from the perspective of true science (chemistry), viruses have never been isolated, purified, or characterized. Therefore, they cannot be the cause of illness. Most “viral illnesses” are diagnosed using scientifically fraudulent tests — PCR, antibody tests, etc. — not by identifying any actual physical entity.

So, are “awake” doctors helpful?
Unfortunately, no. They cannot solve the problem because they are part of it — even if unknowingly. Their ignorance and misplaced confidence helped create false vaccines, false diseases, and false fears.

The real solution is not more medical advice.
The real solution is to challenge the fraudulent scientific foundation.

Bring in experts in true science—chemistry—to address the issue of virus isolation. The moment it is honestly examined, the entire problem disappears.

No virus → no viral disease → no need for vaccines.
Remove the fraudulent testing and fraudulent medical science, and people recover naturally.

This is what must be addressed—not repeated medical narratives, even from “awake” doctors.

Please forward this message directly to Senator Ron Johnson—it is important that he sees it.

Rethinking Cancer: A Mislabelled Mystery (link)
Vaccines and the COVID virus (link)
Claims of vaccines’ relevancy and efficacy – a big fat lie! (link)
The science behind COVID and vaccines! (link)
A Simple And Direct Question RFK Jr Needs To Ask – A Suggestion (link)
Quackery in White Coats (link)
Chemistry, Not Medicine, Defines Science (link)
Critical Review of Medical Authority and Scientific Legitimacy (link)
Questioning Medical Authority: Show Your Science Credentials (link)
What is science, and who are scientists? (link)
My training and expertise – people ask! (link)

A Chemist’s Perspective on What That Really Means

Recently, Dr. Malone commented: “President Trump wants to know whether or not there’s actual science behind the entire [children’s vaccination] schedule.”

This is indeed an interesting statement. If the President of the United States is questioning whether there is actual science behind vaccination, then it deserves serious attention.

Dr. Robert Malone, often credited with pioneering mRNA technology, has participated in discussions with public health officials and working group leaders, including those affiliated with the ACIP and HHS.

Dr. Malone, often regarded as one of the key figures behind mRNA vaccine development, should have been the first to respond with confidence and evidence. As someone long associated with “science,” he should have assured the President that the science is sound, settled, and proven.

But instead, he appeared to agree — implying that perhaps something is wrong with the science itself and that it needs to be “fixed.”

(more…)