Category: Virus

I recently watched a clip of Dr. David Rasnick, Ph.D., a trained (bio-) chemist—speaking confidently about the existence of viruses (link). I must admit, it left me genuinely saddened. Here is someone with a scientific background, someone who should instinctively rely on empirical evidence, yet he has accepted the idea of viruses as real, physical entities.

Some attempt to soften the claim by saying viruses are “actually exosomes,” as if a new label resolves the scientific issue. But it does not.

Whether one calls them viruses or exosomes makes no difference. The fundamental question remains: Where is the physical evidence of their existence?

The confirmation can only occur through isolation, not through assumption, interpretation, or narrative.

(more…)

The hidden aspect of the problem is that the entire pharmaceutical industry operates under the direction and authority of medical science — or, more accurately, the false belief in the authority of medical science. This so-called “science” dictates the rules, methods, and interpretations that the pharmaceutical world must follow. As long as this illusion remains unchallenged, nothing will change. Pharma will continue producing and promoting substances based on fraudulent assumptions, while presenting them as products of science.

Whenever someone attempts to expose or stop this falsehood, they are immediately confronted by physicians and their self-declared “scientific” authority. These individuals act as both the defenders and the enforcers of the same system. Naturally, they will never admit that pharmaceutical practices are built on their own unscientific foundation. Thus, the cycle of deception sustains itself — medicine validating medicine, doctors protecting doctors, and all under the banner of “science.” If this situation is ever to be corrected, the solution lies not with physicians or “medical scientists,” but with true scientists — the chemists. Medicine, after all, deals with chemicals: their composition, purity, reactions, and effects. Only chemistry — the real science — can examine and reveal what is genuine and what is false in medicine. Until chemists reclaim that role, the public will continue to suffer under the rule of false science disguised as healing.

A Plea for Scientific Clarity: An Open Letter to RFK Jr (link).

There has been a vigorous discussion lately about who truly qualifies as a scientist. I have often explained what science actually is — and, by extension, who can rightly be called a scientist. Many have reacted critically, even sarcastically. While disagreement is expected, the level of hostility is both amazing and laughable.

It is understandable, though. Challenging long-held assumptions is never easy. People prefer to describe science from afar rather than define it from within. For most, “science” has become a vague and symbolic term — something anyone can claim to represent, even without ever studying or practicing it. They often cite literature written by others, without realizing that much of it is built on a mistaken understanding of what science truly is.

(more…)

Dear RFK Jr.,

Please reconsider your position on this topic. There is no doubt that vaccines can be extremely harmful and may even trigger severe infections — sometimes mislabeled as “cancer,” which itself remains an ill-defined illness. However, such vaccine-related harm cannot logically be attributed to any “virus,” since no valid scientific evidence has ever demonstrated the existence of viruses.

Claims regarding viruses are based entirely on assumptions made by medical professionals who lack the scientific training and expertise required to isolate, purify, and characterize substances — including what they call viruses. It is only through the disciplined methods of true science — particularly chemistry — that such determinations can be made. Based on those scientific principles, no virus has ever been isolated or shown to exist.

A simple and valid requirement for proving the existence of any virus is the availability of a purified and fully characterized specimen — a tangible sample in a test tube or vial. No such sample exists.

The logical extension of this fact is that all related claims — including virus testing, so-called pandemics, and vaccine effectiveness — cannot be scientifically valid. There is no evidence that an actual viral specimen has ever been used in such investigations or research. These claims, therefore, are misleading and unsupported by real science.



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)

There is little doubt that individuals like Dr. Marcus Zervos (M.D.) — and many others within the medical establishment — have failed to act in an honest and honorable manner (‘I’d Be Finished’: Vaccine Researcher Trashes Own Study to Save Career, link). Yet, a more profound and more important question arises: why would they not act honorably?

The answer is simple but disturbing. Any individual within the system who dares to question or expose misconduct would be judged by the very authorities he is accusing — the so-called medical experts operating under the umbrella of “medical science.” In such an environment, even legitimate criticism is dismissed as a “personal opinion,” or the critic is accused of conducting a “poorly designed study.” The system is structured so that the accused also serve as the judges, leaving no possibility of an objective review or scientific accountability.

This is not a theoretical concern. The same situation occurred to the author himself when he questioned the validity of the drug dissolution testing used to assess the quality of pharmaceutical products such as tablets and capsules. This test, long accepted by pharmaceutical authorities, is scientifically false and fraudulent. Despite raising these concerns for years, the issue was repeatedly deflected, with officials insisting that “medical and pharmaceutical authorities” must address it — the very bodies benefiting from its continued use.

Eventually, a formal complaint was submitted through a Citizen Petition to the U.S. FDA. Predictably, FDA experts reviewed the petition. The same experts enforce and defend the very technique in question. After nearly four years, the FDA’s final response was that the test “Method validation and verification encompasses the apparatus used in the method; the apparatus is not separately validated.” Case closed. The circular — and rather dodgy — reasoning was complete: the apparatus wasn’t validated, yet it was deemed validated simply because the authorities stated so (link).

The same fraudulent logic applies to the PCR test, which has been misused as a diagnostic tool for viruses and illnesses without any scientific validation. Despite repeated objections from independent scientists, medical authorities continue to rely on it — fueling false claims of viral diseases, pandemics, and vaccine needs.

At the core of this problem lies the medical and pharmaceutical establishment itself — the main culprit of dishonesty and fraud — which has falsely claimed to be practicing “science.” In truth, it operates under a counterfeit version of science, detached from the foundations of true science: chemistry, physics, and mathematics.

What makes the current exposure of this fraud possible is that certain inquiries — such as those initiated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (RFK, Jr.) and Senator Ron Johnson— come from outside the medical hierarchy, from individuals not bound by medical credentials or interests. Only such independent third-party oversight can bring truth to light.

If genuine audits or evaluations of “medical science” are ever to occur, they must be conducted by experts in real science — chemists, physicists, and mathematicians — not by physicians judging themselves. Once such an independent review is undertaken, the fraud of “virus,” “vaccine,” and “medical science” will collapse swiftly, revealing the profession for what it has become: a trade built on unscientific assumptions rather than measurable truth. It is time, therefore, to handle this issue from its proper perspective — through the lens of true science (chemistry), not medical authority.

“If you claim that cancers are caused by a parasite, the burden of proof is on you to identify that parasite.” (From FB, link)

Fair enough. But I am not claiming that a parasite causes cancer. What I am suggesting is far more fundamental — that cancer itself may not exist as a distinct disease. What we call “cancer” might simply be a mislabelled condition — perhaps involving parasites or other microbial agents — that has never been properly examined from a true scientific standpoint.

It is time to think afresh. For decades, “cancer research” has produced endless classifications, new names, and countless studies, yet no real cure. Is it not legitimate to question what these researchers have actually achieved, beyond showing frightening images and promoting highly expensive treatments and services?

The deeper problem may lie in who is conducting the research. Medical professionals, rather than actual scientists, dominate the field. Most cancer researchers are trained in medicine or biology, not in the actual sciences — chemistry, physics, or mathematics — that form the foundation of real scientific inquiry. As a result, much of their work lacks the precision and discipline that true science demands.

The situation resembles what we see in virology (now commonly recognized as a false and fraudulent activity or research): vast amounts of funding, publications, and laboratory activity, yet no verifiable isolation or purification of the claimed entities — whether viruses or cancer “cells.” It is a bizarre state of affairs.

The real path forward lies not in more grants or drug trials, but in the courage to ask whether “cancer” has ever been defined scientifically at all — rather than through images and obscure chemical jargon.

“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.

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…)

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)