Category: Vaccine

(link)

Is an axe coming? I believe an axe (sledgehammer?) should be coming.

The agency is based on doctors’ science, which is fake and false, as doctors do not study or are not trained in science and scientific research. The agency has lost its credibility as a science-based organization during the (fake) pandemic based on a fake (scientifically invalid and fraudulent) test and developing or accepting a vaccine use without testing them against the virus or its illness or infection.

People Losing Trust In Medical Professionals; Why? (link).

People trusted the medical profession and professionals (physicians) and believed in them as science followers or scientists. Considering their claims as scientific, people accepted that viruses and pandemics exist, that vaccines (developed by physicians) are needed, and that they work to treat illnesses (pandemic) like COVID-19.

Unfortunately, they (physicians) lied. They never studied or worked with science. All the claims, like virus isolation or existence, (PCR) testing, pandemic, vaccines, lab-leak theories, gain of function research, etc., have no scientific validity and are fictional narratives.

So, the issues should be addressed accordingly.

Vaccines Against Viruses – How? (link)
Physicians as Scientists: A Hideous Claim: (link)
Misinformation By Physicians – A Need For An Audit (link).
What is science, and who are scientists? (link)

“At Last, a Mainstream Media Article that Mentions a Direct Link Between Covid Vaccines and Cancer (link).”

I read this article with great interest, written by Dr. Angus Dalgleish (MBBS), a senior physician specializing in oncology, immunology, and HIV-related virology (link).  

Note that his expertise is based on two things: medical credentials (a non-science undergraduate degree, MBBS) and HIV research, i.e., working with a virus, like many others, including COVID-19, which has not shown to exist.

It clearly shows that Dr. Dalgleish would have limited or no expertise in science. Therefore, although the observations described may be correct and relevant, such an article should not merit a scientific assessment.

From a scientific perspective, it reflects opinions and guesses, like the existence of the COVID-19 virus, its testing, development, and claim of safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines. It is critical to note that no scientific evidence shows that mRNA vaccines even contain expected mRNA (link). It is an opinion or a guess. So, it is unclear whether mRNA/vaccines cause cancer.

In this regard, one should also note that cancer itself is a vague or undefined illness – based on pictures (biopsies), like the identification of viruses based on pictures of cultures. Clear, defined, or valid scientific evidence is lacking.

On the other hand, the mRNA vaccine’s toxicity appears to result from a poor manufacturing process. They (vaccines) are most likely contaminated with bacteria (as indicated by the presence of DNA in vaccine vials) used for manufacturing; however, they are not properly removed (link).

Therefore, there is a strong possibility that cancers, as well as heart issues/inflammation, are misdiagnosed, but illnesses are effects of bacterial infections. This serious oversight must be considered more thoroughly by actual scientists and may be treated accordingly, like with antiinfectives. Antiinfectives have been described as successful in treating so-called COVID-19 or its vaccine toxicities (link).

(link)

I would agree with such an observation that Ivermectin and Fenbendazole can be treatments for so-called tubo-cancer. I believe “turbo-cancer” is a misdiagnosed illness (based on doctors’ science – the fake science) when it could very well be a microbial infection. As the two medicines mentioned above are known for their anti-parasitic effect, it is not surprising they provide a remedy for the disease, a commonly noted side effect of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Ivermectin and COVID-19 Controversy – Why? (link)
Why Do People Get Sick – A View! (Part 2) (link)
Why do people get sick – a view! (link)

“I [Dr. Peter Hotez] want people to see us as real,” he says. “We’re not these shadowy figures in white coats plotting nefarious things. We became scientists because we wanted to do good in the world.” (link).

And that is the main confusion and the problem.

As an M.D., he (like others) is a physician, not a scientist. It is a false claim. A scientist is trained in science subjects, specifically physics, chemistry, and/or mathematics, with long and exhaustive hands-on experience in these laboratories. (link)

Physicians do not study or are trained in such subjects but study mostly to prescribe (diagnose)  treatments/medicines (link). They are not trained to invent, develop, manufacture, or test medicines, mostly chemical compounds. These topics belong to actual science/chemistry experts (scientists).

In the case of vaccine development, doctors’ lack of understanding of science is evident. Vaccines, like mRNA – a chemical molecule/compound, were developed to claim efficacious against the virus or illnesses/infections. However, the issue is that vaccines have not been evaluated or tested against the virus or its infection (patients) – as the virus specimen is unavailable to test against. It is a false claim, i.e., vaccines have been tested against viruses or illnesses (link). A true scientist would not make such a claim.

Therefore, physicians should stop considering themselves science followers, experts, or scientists. It is a false claim that causes enormous damage to public health, wealth, and physicians’ own professional credibility.

link

Neither do you, Joe Rogan. I am sorry. Even those who differed and considered themselves scientists were not scientists and provided false science narratives. Would you give me a chance to explain what science is and where medical experts went wrong?

What is science, and who are scientists? (link)
My training and expertise – people ask! (link)


Headline: EXCLUSIVE: FDA lab uncovers excess DNA contamination in COVID-19 vaccines (link)

It is a substack article based on “research” conducted by high school students and published in a High School Science Journal. (link).

The conclusion from the article is reasonable, i.e., the vaccine may be contaminated with DNA, which is not new information, as I noted in my article more than a year ago. (link).

The rest of the claims made are quite exaggerated or borderline false, like:

“An explosive new study conducted within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) own laboratory has revealed excessively high levels of DNA contamination in Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.”

There is nothing explosive here. However, the study appears to have been conducted within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) laboratory. I would not consider it like this – a research study from an FDA laboratory. It is a high school science project where students learn techniques. It is not an FDA study; there is no authorship from the FDA. The authors of the article clearly state

“The content of this publication only contains the opinions of the authors and does not reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Many or most claims are speculative. So, I would leave it here.

In short, the article describes a well-known aspect of DNA contamination of mRNA vaccines. The toxicity of vaccines due to DNA is a weak or unproven argument, but observing DNA suggests potential bacterial contamination causing vaccine toxicity.

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.