I agree. McCullough did come out early and continued to fight for the truth. We have to understand there is a level of ignorance here to recognize even with McCullough. We all know only so much. And someone as highly trained as McCullough has the additional challenge of overcoming everything he has been trained to accept, ie, to overcome…
I agree. McCullough did come out early and continued to fight for the truth. We have to understand there is a level of ignorance here to recognize even with McCullough. We all know only so much. And someone as highly trained as McCullough has the additional challenge of overcoming everything he has been trained to accept, ie, to overcome the paradigms his training has conditioned him to accept as unassailable. The virus model is one such paradigm. Challenges to such well-established paradigms always come from outside the subject area of expertise because those that operate within the established paradigm cannot see the contradictions to those paradigms that are right in front of them. Call it confirmation bias. This is well explained in the academic work of Thomas Kuhn, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions".
My guess is that McCullough is still operating under the assumption that the natural covid virus is real and that there really is/was a pandemic. But I have not seen anything to question his ethics or motivation.
Two of my favorite commenters on here having a respectful and intelligent contrary discussion, without impugning each others motive, stating opinion as fact, or otherwise using bad faith tactics. You guys are great.
Excellent reference JSR! Thank you. This adds to my contention that McCullough is operating under false premises - intentionally or otherwise. This information is not a good look for McCullough....
"...The current rabbit hole down which I currently find myself began a week or so ago, with Peter McCullough’s rather shocking endorsement of siRNA to combat the mRNA injections that have been deployed around the world.
I found it stunning that a doctor so outspoken about the harms of mRNA, would nonchalantly suggest injecting some siRNA to negate the previously injected mRNA.
Considering how outspoken Dr. McCullough has been about the toxic nature of the lipid nanoparticles delivering mRNA, it is surprising that he didn’t mention on substack that this silent interfering RNA (siRNA) also gets delivered in a lipid nanoparticle (LNP)..."
"...Dr PM is a clinician, not a basic science researcher. His subspecialty is non-interventional cardiology with a master’s degree in public health. He appears to have no actual working knowledge of molecular biology, drug or biological product design/development or in the laboratory setting. The payments documented here would therefore appear to be for the purpose of marketing potential or new products in his capacity as a well-recognized public medical spokesperson.
...If pathological viruses don’t exist (which seems increasingly likely), there can’t be any bird flu. In the unlikely circumstance that bird flu actually exists but can’t be diagnosed with PCR tests (PCR was proven to be an unreliable diagnostic test for CV19), bird flu can’t be diagnosed reliably. If that’s true, there is no medical indication for SiRNA’s or an mRNA “vaccine” for this alleged disease. The fundamental underlying assumptions upon which this new treatment is based, are either extremely doubtful or false. Anyone making such claims is at the least, highly suspect.
Moreover, when you see words/phrases like “seem effective", realize you are being subjected to propaganda since they are not valid medical or scientific terms..."
I agree. McCullough did come out early and continued to fight for the truth. We have to understand there is a level of ignorance here to recognize even with McCullough. We all know only so much. And someone as highly trained as McCullough has the additional challenge of overcoming everything he has been trained to accept, ie, to overcome the paradigms his training has conditioned him to accept as unassailable. The virus model is one such paradigm. Challenges to such well-established paradigms always come from outside the subject area of expertise because those that operate within the established paradigm cannot see the contradictions to those paradigms that are right in front of them. Call it confirmation bias. This is well explained in the academic work of Thomas Kuhn, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions".
My guess is that McCullough is still operating under the assumption that the natural covid virus is real and that there really is/was a pandemic. But I have not seen anything to question his ethics or motivation.
Two of my favorite commenters on here having a respectful and intelligent contrary discussion, without impugning each others motive, stating opinion as fact, or otherwise using bad faith tactics. You guys are great.
https://open.substack.com/pub/conspiracysarah/p/deep-dive-lipid-nanoparticle-sirna?r=u16ew&utm_medium=ios
Excellent reference JSR! Thank you. This adds to my contention that McCullough is operating under false premises - intentionally or otherwise. This information is not a good look for McCullough....
"...The current rabbit hole down which I currently find myself began a week or so ago, with Peter McCullough’s rather shocking endorsement of siRNA to combat the mRNA injections that have been deployed around the world.
I found it stunning that a doctor so outspoken about the harms of mRNA, would nonchalantly suggest injecting some siRNA to negate the previously injected mRNA.
Considering how outspoken Dr. McCullough has been about the toxic nature of the lipid nanoparticles delivering mRNA, it is surprising that he didn’t mention on substack that this silent interfering RNA (siRNA) also gets delivered in a lipid nanoparticle (LNP)..."
"...Dr PM is a clinician, not a basic science researcher. His subspecialty is non-interventional cardiology with a master’s degree in public health. He appears to have no actual working knowledge of molecular biology, drug or biological product design/development or in the laboratory setting. The payments documented here would therefore appear to be for the purpose of marketing potential or new products in his capacity as a well-recognized public medical spokesperson.
...If pathological viruses don’t exist (which seems increasingly likely), there can’t be any bird flu. In the unlikely circumstance that bird flu actually exists but can’t be diagnosed with PCR tests (PCR was proven to be an unreliable diagnostic test for CV19), bird flu can’t be diagnosed reliably. If that’s true, there is no medical indication for SiRNA’s or an mRNA “vaccine” for this alleged disease. The fundamental underlying assumptions upon which this new treatment is based, are either extremely doubtful or false. Anyone making such claims is at the least, highly suspect.
Moreover, when you see words/phrases like “seem effective", realize you are being subjected to propaganda since they are not valid medical or scientific terms..."
https://open.substack.com/pub/conspiracysarah/p/deep-dive-lipid-nanoparticle-sirna