Category: Vaccine

“Doctors and researchers are stunned after an experimental treatment using an anti-parasitic drug — originally designed to fight infections — showed unexpected success against cancer.” (link)

Why not look at it from another angle? Perhaps the anti-parasitic drug is simply doing what it was meant to do — treating a parasitic illness — and what we call cancer may actually be a misdiagnosed or mislabeled condition. With this kind of reasoning, not only could the so-called cancer be treated effectively, but it might also reveal that cancer has been misclassified from the start, much like “viral infections,” where no actual virus has ever been demonstrated to exist.

The reason such logical explanations are ignored is simple: most so-called medical experts — especially physicians — are not trained in real science, such as chemistry, nor in conducting genuine scientific research. As a result, they make unscientific and false claims or assumptions under the banner of “science.”

(more…)

“We hope this additional treatment will stop the cancer from returning.”

They are working with hope, not with science. That is the essence of today’s so-called “medical science” — it runs on hope, not on evidence grounded in chemistry or physics.

Doctors speak of “mRNA technology,” but there is no such technology in the scientific sense. It is merely a chemical formulation—a mixture said to contain a compound called mRNA. In truth, there is no verified test to confirm the presence or purity of this mRNA, because no isolated or purified reference material exists.

So, what remains? Hope — the same hope that surrounded the COVID-19 “mRNA vaccines.” Everyone now knows how that turned out: a human tragedy of global proportions, buried under layers of denial and cover-ups.

Just as with “viruses” — unseen, undefined, and unverified entities — the medical world now constructs “cancer” as another illusion, a diagnosis based on images and tissue fragments rather than isolated, characterized substances. Despite decades of funding and experimentation, they have not found, controlled, or scientifically explained either.

Yet, the public continues to trust “medical science,” unaware that its foundation rests on untested methods like the clinical trial — celebrated as the gold standard, but never scientifically validated for its intended purpose. It is not a scientific tool; it is a commercial and regulatory instrument designed to maintain control and to continue medical foolishness and fraud.

And so, the cycle continues:

Hope, not science — marketing, not measurement — faith, not proof.

It should be clearly understood that when medical experts refer to science, they mean medical science, not true science.

True science is the study of physical and tangible substances, guided by precise observation, experimentation, and measurement. It includes disciplines such as chemistry, physics, and mathematics — fields that rely on verifiable data, reproducible results, and the logical interpretation of evidence. Those who study these subjects in depth, supported by rigorous academic education and extensive experimental training, are the real scientists.

In contrast, what is called medical science is not science in the true sense. It is a fraudulent imitation of science, borrowing its language and symbols — especially from chemistry — but without its rigor or proof. Physicians’ claims to be “scientists” rest mainly on non-scientific professional, mostly undergraduate degrees such as the M.D., which offer no meaningful training in science and provide little or no genuine scientific credentials.

Over the past five or six decades, most of what has been presented as “medical research” has been false, misleading, or irrelevant — bearing little connection to real illness, its testing, or its treatment. This deception is most evident in the diagnosis of virus-based illnesses, the testing for them, and the development and administration of vaccines.

Despite billions of dollars spent through research grants and donations, there remains no purified sample of any virus, no scientifically validated test, and no vaccine proven effective against an actual, demonstrable virus. What exists instead are claims — supported by publications filled with the terminology of true science (chemistry) but devoid of its substance.

Therefore, physicians’ repeated assertions that they are “following science” must be critically examined. Most of these claims would collapse under the standards of genuine scientific evaluation. It is time to recognize that medical science is not real science — and that true understanding of health and disease can only come through the actual sciences, led by chemistry.

I saw this picture (left) and began to think: if the poisonous view of vaccines was already known and circulating in the late nineteenth century, how did vaccine use and recommendation become so widespread—even into modern times? A brief review of the literature shaped my conclusion: physicians are not scientific experts but rather professionals rebranded under a misleading title—medical science, or more precisely, fraudulent science. No wonder we remain trapped in a profession that labels itself “science” when, in truth, it is not.

If this deception was recognized even in its early days, why has it continued to be accepted as legitimate science? The answer lies in the gradual transformation of the medical profession during that period. Until the mid-1800s, physicians were regarded as healers—educated in anatomy, herbs, and observation—but they were not engaged in experimental or physical science. Their practice was practical and empirical, at times even philosophical, but never chemical or quantitative.

(more…)

There is no scientific basis or justification for vaccination (link). I support Senator Rand Paul’s position on this matter and offer a scientific argument for it. Unfortunately, physicians are not in a position to counter this discussion, because the question is not medical (mistakenly assumed) but scientific in nature. Moreover, the defense of vaccination has become a matter of pride and ego within the medical community, rather than an objective evaluation of facts.

Institutions such as the CDC and FDA are now trapped in their own contradictions. Their predicament arises from years of misrepresenting medical practices as “science-based.” The central falsehood is the claim that the development and validation of vaccines are grounded in genuine science, and that physicians are scientists conducting scientific work. In reality, physicians receive little or no education, training, or experience in the true sciences—namely, chemistry, physics, and mathematics. Medicines, including vaccines, are chemical entities; therefore, their study and evaluation properly belong to chemistry, not medicine. What medicine presents in the name of science is, in fact, an imitation — a form of fake chemistry and fabricated experimentation.

(more…)

Thanks for asking my opinion on the topic of autism (link). By education, training, and expertise, I consider myself a scientist — more precisely, a chemist. Chemistry, among all the sciences, is the discipline that deals with the study of natural substances and their functions, including those within the human body. From this fundamental and scientific perspective, chemistry provides the most authentic and authoritative view of how the body functions — and how it malfunctions.

Understanding the human body through chemistry is not simple, but it is the most direct and logical approach to exploring health and disease. The body is an extraordinarily complex chemical machine, yet at its physical level, it operates through remarkably simple and predictable chemical principles. The major components of the body — carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, calcium, and trace elements like iron (in numerous combinations, called molecules) — behave and react just as they do outside the body, following the same laws of chemistry.

The Loss of Chemistry in Medicine

The first step toward understanding illness should always be the study of the body’s chemistry. Unfortunately, over the past five to six decades, the science of medicine has been gradually taken over by medical and pharmaceutical professionals who speak the language of chemistry but are not trained in it. They use chemical terminology, draw chemical formulas, and claim to conduct “scientific” research — yet very few of them have even the basic understanding of what chemistry actually represents.

(more…)

When asked, “What recent scientific discovery has fascinated you?“ my thoughts turn to the curious case of ivermectin and cancer — two seemingly unrelated entities now being linked in medical discussions (link).

As the article noted, “Ivermectin, widely known for treating parasitic infections…“ — and indeed, that is an established fact. Ivermectin was developed and prescribed as an antiparasitic drug. So how, suddenly, has it become associated with treating “cancer”? Could it be that what is being diagnosed as cancer might, in fact, be a misidentified parasitic or microbial illness?

Modern medicine has a long history of misdiagnosis — and even of creating diseases and treatments out of nothing. Virus-based illnesses provide a glaring example. There is no valid scientific evidence that viruses, as defined by medicine, actually exist; therefore, the so-called “viral diseases” cannot exist either. Yet, drugs and vaccines have been developed to treat these imaginary or mischaracterized conditions, from AIDS to COVID-19.

(more…)

This perspective may be both interesting and disturbing from the standpoint of a scientist and student of science. Dr. Hazan claims to have been involved in science for an extended period (link). Yet her training is in medicine, and her work centers on clinical practice and studies, which she equates with science. But how does conducting clinical trials or working with bacteria suddenly make one a scientific expert—or a scientist? At best, such activities fall under applied biology and observational practice. Unfortunately, many people, including physicians, wrongly assume this qualifies them to call themselves scientists.

The most glaring flaw in her claims is the belief in viruses and her assertion that  “[her lab] was the first lab to document the entire sequence of the virus.” Scientifically, this is impossible without first isolating the virus itself. To illustrate: if one wishes to prove that sugarcane contains sugar, the process begins with obtaining authentic sugarcane, extracting and isolating the sugar, and characterizing it using well-established chemical methods. Only then can one confirm the presence of sugar in sugarcane. Without authentic sugarcane, any claim of “finding sugar” in it is nonsense. Repeating such claims in scientific language, or publishing them in medical journals, does not make them science.

The harsh truth is that medical experts are not doing science, nor are they scientists. They fail to grasp such analogies because they have never studied science rigorously, nor learned its proper research techniques and methods. Their false claims stem directly from this lack of education. The same misplaced authority of medicine—fundamentally non-scientific training—brought us the so-called fake pandemic, built on the illusion of a virus that never existed to begin with.

Therefore, my request to medical professionals is simple: please refrain from making false claims about “science.” You do not have the credentials, and an M.D. degree has no basis in science. It is essentially a non-science, undergraduate-level qualification in prescribing medicines and following diagnostic procedures, without genuine research. Presenting this as “science” is misleading, untrue, and potentially dangerous. The general public should be aware of the false claims of science.

False Priests of Science (link)  
A Simple And Direct Question RFK Jr Needs To Ask – A Suggestion (link)

It is essential to note that the term “study,” as used here (quote) and throughout much of the medical literature, most often refers to an observational survey rather than a valid scientific study. The same applies to the term “research” in medicine—what is called “medical research” is frequently nothing more than a survey, sometimes with statistical analysis added, but still not scientific research in the true sense.

Actual scientific research requires several non-negotiable elements:

  • Defined and measurable inputs.
  • A controlled test object (humans, animals, or samples), placed in a controlled environment, independent of confounding factors.
  • Clearly defined outputs that can be measured using validated surrogate markers that can serve as substitutes for direct measurement.
  • Reproducibility, so that independent investigators can obtain the same results under the same conditions.

These are not special requirements unique to medicine—they are the basic principles of all scientific investigation.

Because medical education does not teach or train physicians in these principles, they often describe their practices as “science” even when they do not meet these standards. As a result, much of what passes for medical literature is, in fact, false science—opinion and observation presented as evidence.

It is also critical to note that the concept of “cancer” often falls into this same category of survey-based and observational science. Much like “viruses,” cancer diagnosis is mostly image-based, not grounded in rigorous, quantitative, analytical science. Diagnosis and treatment decisions are therefore largely subjective, not based on validated, reproducible measurements. Extreme caution should be exercised, as the potential for misdiagnosis and overtreatment is very high.

Therefore, most—if not all—of the medical literature must be regarded as scientifically suspect. If judged by the same standards applied in other fields, much of it would likely need to be retracted or withdrawn.

An M.D. degree is not a science degree! (link)
The science behind COVID and vaccines! (link)
Chemistry, Not Medicine, Defines Science (link)
Questioning Medical Authority: Show Your Science Credentials (link)
Cancer or Misdiagnosis? An Uncomfortable Truth (link)
What is science, and who are scientists? (link)
My training and expertise – people ask! (link)

“The greatest spreader of misinformation during the pandemic was the United States government.”
“And that is the weaponization of medical research itself.”
“And public-health officials were intellectually dishonest — they lied to the American people.”
Dr. Martin Makary (FDA Commissioner, link)

So why wasn’t this exposed earlier? Because it was buried inside the medical profession and shielded by the label “medical science” — a claim that protected the system from scrutiny. Criticism was silenced and independent checks were blocked. Meanwhile, today’s experts blame their predecessors while promoting the same “medical science.” The result: bogus diagnoses and fraudulent treatments will continue.

The solution is clear and urgent. Stop treating a corrupt “medical science” as an unquestionable truth. Let physicians use their judgment to guide patient care (writing prescriptions), rather than enforcing one-size-fits-all policies from centralized authorities. End all work masquerading as “medical science/research.” Treat medicines as chemical products that must be manufactured, tested, and regulated transparently by accountable chemical manufacturers — not hidden behind professional privilege or the false authority of so-called “pharmaceutical science.”


Do FDA and USP lie? Of course, all the time! (link)
An M.D. degree is not a science degree! (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)