Journey into the parallel universe of pseudoscience

Would you entrust your paper to an online scholarly publisher, whose website states an editorial board “consisting of well-known authors and academics who carefully scrutinize the paper and offer their suggestions for improvisation before publishing it in final form”?

Because that, literally, is it site reads One of many predatory science publishers, named Hillaris Publishing Sr.

Hilaris, an omen name: It would be funny, if it weren’t The usual Stephanie Seniff It has produced countless pieces of rubbish, no different from this Discussed here last Decemberand this rubbish, as if it were a very careful preparation, is immediately devoured by all the different-minded persons to whom it is offered. Individuals such as some of the outstanding dentists Who write “The genetic code vaccinated with mRna serum can integrate into the human genome. Now it’s the scientific literature!”.

Scientific literature in all caps, of course; Because all the rest published in Nature or the Lancet or other journals, supporting the benefits of RNA vaccines, whatever you said, what would you like it to be – worth the lower case at best.

What literature opponents of the vaccine use, and whether it is scientific, you can all guess.

However, let’s try to get in for a moment In the parallel universe of pseudoscience, ignoring the veritable literature of scholarly publishers who, while failing to adequately prevent errors, frauds, and manipulations, certainly do not confuse ‘improvisations’ with ‘improvements’ when introducing themselves, making sense of names like ‘hilaris srl’. “Clear”.

Let’s also try to ignore that the authors of the last group of anti-vaccine words, which are neatly phrased as data-free hypotheses, aren’t the perpetually tired conspiracy theorists Seniff, along with their usual authors we’ve already found In the infamous 2022 plot, That is, the well-known anti-vaccine author who has written other articles against vaccination recanted Peter McCullougha natural healer Greg Nigh who claims to cure cancer with his bullshit and the only one with any proper title, Anthony Kyriakopoulos, but continues to be associated with individuals like those just mentioned.

Let us ignore who the authors are, and try to examine the inferences of the jumble of words without the shadow of the data they suggest to us for the umpteenth time.

Let’s start with the first statement, which matters Alleged proof of fusion into the DNA of vaccinesThe study referred to has not only been criticized for many technical reasons In the same magazine that published itbut above all, the conclusions still repeated by Seneff and co. have been invalidated by the authors original work. For these reasons, reverse transcriptase has not been demonstrated in hepatocellular carcinoma cells and cannot be “unquestionably” based on any adverse neurological effects of the vaccines, as Senev and colleagues argue with usual stupidity in the conclusions of their ludicrous work published by Hilaris Ltd.

On the basis of the false introductions to the aforementioned incorporation of the vaccine sequence into the genome, we then proceed to order genotoxicity tests on the vaccines as usual; Small details that, for example for Moderna, on page 50 of the EMA approval report -epar-public-evaluation-report_en.pdf) specify how this data was presented and that this fact was repeated for parrots that had been repeating the application for nearly two years.

To complete the analysis of the authors’ conclusions, they acknowledge – deo gratias! – that they wrote something purely speculative, but the problem is that they don’t realize how, just to sum up the concept again, their speculations start from false data and incorrect assumptions, and can only lead to unsupported claims.

Finally, perhaps to feign thoughtful, serious scholars concerned about the fate of mankind, the authors demand further research, and a standard close of any work by Seneff on any subject (as it cannot be regarded as such); Luckily, RNA vaccines are the most tested single product released by pharmaceutical companies todaytaking into account the number of independent, blinded clinical trials, the number of participating research groups and the number of patients examined.

So, thanks for the suggestion, new studies are always needed and certainly pharmacovigilance should be maintained and mechanisms capable of causing some rare damage be studied; However, I ask the concerned public to stop asking for an examination of the rubbish produced by those who, throughout their careers, have done nothing but bring up new subjects, on every subject, and make money from people’s concerns.

Let’s be serious, and leave Hilaris Srl for her hilarious posts.