I read a recent Substack article by Dr. Alejandro Diaz (Immunologist and Global Health Expert) commenting on RFK Jr.’s effort to clean up the medical swamp—a remarkable endeavor in its beginnings. (link)

But I want to focus on one particular part of RFK Jr.’s statement. In an HHS press release, he said:

“We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted.”

Here lies the problem: “reviewed the science and listened to the experts.”

In reality, those so-called “experts” are mostly physicians and public health policymakers—individuals routinely portrayed as scientists but who, in fact, are not. The irony is that many of those celebrated as “science experts” lack any formal scientific credentials. This is perhaps the most critical, yet consistently overlooked, element of fraud within the healthcare profession—something even RFK Jr. and others fail to recognize.

Take physicians, for example. They hold an M.D.—a professional degree, not a scientific one. It does not provide rigorous training in foundational sciences, particularly chemistry—the very discipline central to medicine, including vaccines. The vaccine disaster did not stem from science itself, but from non-scientists masquerading as scientists, conducting experimental studies that made no sense. Every so-called study on viruses or viral illnesses proceeded without an actual virus sample or a demonstrable illness. Instead, conclusions leaned almost entirely on the PCR test—a scientifically invalid tool, irrelevant, inaccurate, and unreliable—for detecting both the “virus” and its supposed illness. This is, at best, profound scientific ignorance and, at worst, deliberate fraud carried out under the banner of expertise or science.

In this light, RFK Jr.’s efforts stand as a remarkable contribution toward exposing fraudulent practices at the CDC and within the medical profession. Still, while his work is valuable, it is not grounded in true scientific research or review, but rather in his investigative efforts, aided by sympathetic physicians.

If genuine science had guided health policy, there would never have been “virus” claims to begin with—because viruses, as categorized, have never been shown to exist. And if the virus does not exist, then vaccines against it are impossible by definition. The vaccine tragedy unfolded precisely because fake “science,” conducted and endorsed by physicians without real scientific credentials, replaced actual science.

And now comes the so-called “next step”:

“These statements reflect a dramatic shift in federal vaccine strategy—away from mRNA and toward platforms like whole-virus vaccines and protein-based technologies.”

This makes clear that they intend to remain entrenched in the vaccine business. But as I have already described, there is no virus—and therefore no need, nor even the possibility, of developing any treatment or vaccine. What we are witnessing is not science but medical fantasy.

The author of the article, an immunologist (a branch of biology—hardly a science in the true sense here), is simply working to sustain their virus-based nonsense and pseudo-scientific narrative. RFK Jr. must remain vigilant against such insidious attempts to promote false science and to divert attention from the urgent task of exposing and dismantling fraudulent medical and biological claims that have misled the world.

It is not just the concept that fails, but the logistics as well. To test a vaccine, one must separate an “infected” population from a “healthy” one. That requires a validated test. Yet no validated test exists, because there is no established reference standard for a virus. Therefore, properly designed clinical trials for vaccines are impossible to conduct. What continues instead is the endless beating of a dead horse: viruses, vaccines, and vaccination—vehicles designed only to extract enormous sums of money for fake science and fake scientists. The result is nothing more than a colossal waste of human and financial resources.

And then comes the hollow claim:

“I believe the President and his team at HHS have a momentous opportunity to truly reform these institutions and have a lasting impact on America’s public health.”

This suggests that no lessons have been learned from the catastrophic COVID-19 episode. Continuing down this path—with viruses and vaccines—only ensures that history will repeat itself, likely on an even larger scale.

It is time to stop. There is no such thing as “medical science.” There is no virus, and there never was. Therefore, there is no need for vaccines, nor could there ever be an effective one. To proceed with this charade is not progress but the continuation of fraudulent science—an enterprise that harms people, wastes resources, and corrupts the very meaning of science itself.

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)

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. In general, I agree with your comment and conclusion—except for the last sentence: “A formal education in a topic doesn’t guarantee you are right.” (link)

I often hear this view, and frankly, it troubles me. Yes, many scientists wrongly treat their education as a seal of correctness. However, a more significant issue is that non-scientists often forcefully impose their views with absolute certainty. This is the real tragedy: those who have studied and worked in genuine science are placed on the same level as those who have not. People without scientific training—including physicians—often assume the authority of science without having been scientists themselves.

(more…)

“A re-analysis of the Pfizer and Moderna trials, published in Vaccine by eminent, independent scientists—including BMJ associate editor Peter Doshi—revealed that from the very beginning, the rate of harm in these trials was alarming. According to their findings, you were two to four times more likely to suffer serious harm from taking the COVID-19 vaccine.” Paraphrased from Dr. Malhotra’s recent presentation (link).

Impressive! After four years of vaccine rollout—and with significant harms now being reported—Dr. Aseem Malhotra, once a loud and loyal supporter of vaccines (including the COVID-19 vaccine), has suddenly reinvented himself as a leading activist against them. Remember, this is the same man who proudly proclaimed: “Some of the greatest achievements in medicine are traditional vaccines, no doubt.” (link)

(more…)

Cures or treatments are only possible for real illnesses—not for imaginary or fabricated ones like “viruses” and their supposed diseases. For decades, billions of dollars have been poured into developing treatments for viral infections, yet nothing has been eradicated; instead, infections appear more frequently, not just in isolated cases but as global “pandemics.” The irony is that no one has ever produced an actual sample of the virus they claim to be working so hard to cure. Has the world ever seen greater con-artistry—run under the banner of science by people with no true expertise in science?

The same holds true for cancer. Billions have been spent on cancer research by the very same “science” experts who push the virus narrative. If what they label as “cancer” is most likely a microbial infection, then, of course, there can be no cure under their framework. Instead, they push lethal chemicals and destructive procedures, generating enormous profits for practitioners and corporations. Why would they ever admit it is a microbial infection treatable with inexpensive medicines? That would not only collapse their business model but also expose the fraud of modern science—another textbook case of modern-day con-artistry.

It is time to stop funding this fraudulent version of “medical science.” No more research grants for it, no more unearned titles of “science experts” or “scientists” for physicians pretending to practice science. Then—and only then—will we begin to see illnesses truly disappear from this earth.

Cancer or Misdiagnosis? An Uncomfortable Truth (link)


The following article has been written in response to a query.

Query:

Saeed Qureshi Let’s say you have two groups. One given the drug/treatment and the other a placebo. Then, it’s observed that over a long period of time one group suffers certain side effects and the other doesn’t. Can’t we at least determine from this that whatever is in the drug is causing these side effects?

Response:

Your argument is logical and valid, and one can certainly draw inferences from it. However, such inferences remain observations—they cannot be treated as firm conclusions or as valid scientific studies. The key distinction lies in the nature of scientific research: a true scientific study requires controls, or in other words, a controlled design. At a minimum, three critical components must be addressed:

  • Input (the drug or treatment)
  • The human body (physiology of the volunteer/subject)
  • Output (the measured effect or response)
(more…)

The Florida Department of Health, in partnership with the governor, is going to be working to end all vaccine mandates in Florida. Every last one of them. (link)

There is good news.

However, this should be viewed only as a beginning, not an end. It does not address the core problem with vaccines, which is that they are not a scientifically valid treatment. There is no science behind them. Therefore, not only should mandates be removed, but vaccination itself must be abolished. There is no proven benefit—at least none shown scientifically—since there is no virus or illness against which they have been tested.

Keeping vaccines approved gives the false impression to the public that they are useful and valuable products. Worse, it props up the false legitimacy of “medical science” as if it were real science, when in fact it is neither. One must be extremely cautious in continuing with this so-called “medical science,” which is a fraudulent construct that must be stopped.

No grants or funding should be allocated to “medical science” under the guidance or authority of physicians, because it was precisely this group (lacking scientific education and expertise) that created the vaccination problem in the first place.

COVID and vaccines – ask and listen (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)

Anyone with a shred of intelligence knows there is no virus. RFK Jr. is far more intelligent than most, and he surely knows this. The issue is that the medical establishment always drags anyone who questions the virus or vaccine narrative into their own “court of science.” In that court, they always win, because it is their court—others are beaten down, silenced, or give up. No one is allowed to truly challenge their version of “science,” which is nothing more than fraud.

Medical experts, in particular physicians, are, in fact, the least knowledgeable in real science. They have zero scientific credentials, yet they lie about having them. This is the critical point: rather than demanding records on vaccines or viruses, authorities must first demand that they prove their claim that their work is based on science and that they have the required education and expertise in science. They cannot—because they have no credentials. At that moment, the game is over. Not just viruses, but vaccines and much more will unravel.

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)

Physicians are trained to practice medicine, not to do science. Their education is clinical—focused on diagnosis, treatment, and patient management. It does not provide rigorous training in analytical chemistry, pharmacology at depth, toxicology, or experimental design. Yet, many physicians present themselves as “scientific experts,” blurring the line between clinical authority and true scientific expertise.

Medical standards and guidelines are often written and enforced by these same physicians, creating a closed circle where their opinions reinforce each other and are then presented as “science.” Peer-reviewed publications in medical journals frequently repeat this cycle, offering conclusions that are based more on consensus and authority than on solid scientific evidence.

This is why physicians’ claims to be scientific authorities must be challenged. Clinical practice does not equal science. Without grounding in the methods of genuine scientific disciplines, their declarations about viruses, vaccines, or drug mechanisms rest on weak foundations. The authority they project is false, and it must be exposed as such.

Like I wrote:
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)


This morning, someone asked me about the separation and characterization of alleged viruses—or particles in general. I shared the following response, which I believe may also be useful to others. (The original query is attached below.)

Let me explain, as there seems to be some misunderstanding. SDS-PAGE is a separation technique, essentially a sorting tool. [Edited: In general, SDS-PAGE separation refers to the use of Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) in combination with polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE)]. The application of a reference standard (or calibration) to an SDS-PAGE plate will indicate where the particles of interest are expected to migrate or be observed. Once the SDS-PAGE run is completed, we see a band at that location. However, from a professional and scientific perspective, the work is not finished at this point. The band we see may or may not correspond to the actual particles of interest—it could be slightly different, or even completely unrelated particles, but of the same size. This is because SDS-PAGE only separates particles based on their size; it does not identify them. For this reason, SDS-PAGE is classified as a separation technique, not a characterization technique. In this context, SDS-PAGE can be viewed as a more efficient alternative to ultracentrifugation, another separation technique that offers significantly lower resolution compared to SDS-PAGE.

(more…)

I would like to add some comments on the narrative (link). For convenience, the narrative is attached below.

Regarding the statement: “Immunization Practices (ACIP) has formed a new work group to review COVID-19 vaccines, focusing on safety, effectiveness, immunogenicity, and persistence of vaccine components such as mRNA, spike protein, and lipid nanoparticles.”

It must be stated plainly: the so-called components—mRNA, spike protein, lipid-related nanoparticles—are imaginary constructs manufactured by what passes as “medical science.” This is not legitimate science, but rather a pseudo-scientific framework built on assumptions rather than evidence. The entire narrative is tied to the concept of “viruses.” Yet, no virus has ever been scientifically demonstrated to exist as an actual, isolated, and purified entity in humans or animals. Without that proof, the rest collapses.

(more…)