People often object to my views/articles, stating that I only reference my blog articles (i.e., self-referencing) and do not cite articles from peer-reviewed journals concerning the existence of the virus and its related topics. The lack of articles on the subject in peer-reviewed journals is of concern about the credibility and authenticity of my work.
On the other hand, they argue that numerous scientific articles from various sources are available and published in peer-reviewed journals showing, that the virus exists and has been isolated. Hence, their claims for the virus’s existence are credible.
People here are confusing consensus with the true physical (experimental) science. The view is that many studies about the virus have been published in the literature, so the virus must be there and isolated. That is consensus. However, I practice and describe experimental physical science (actual science – chemistry), which requires an actual sample of a substance to work with, in this case, the virus. As no actual virus sample is available, I cannot do scientific studies, publish, or write like others, i.e., publish fake science studies (for example, see here).
This practice of fake science in the medical/virology areas is common and alarming. It cannot be addressed internally as they all believe fake science is real/actual science, causing huge damage to science and the public.
An external audit can only address the issue, which will quickly show that medical experts have been working with fake science and have never been with actual science. If not all, most of the publications will have to be withdrawn as having no merit or value. Most people who are not knowledgeable in science do not realize the disastrous fakeness of science in the medical and pharmaceutical areas.
I hope this helps clear up the concern.