Over the past week or so I have felt it increasingly necessary to comment on a video that has been circulating recently. At first, I hoped it would be confined to the far-right sites where it is being promoted. These past few days I have seen an uptick on social media and feel it is necessary to weigh in with a little more detail. I normally keep my comments to myself with such loaded topics but this is one where bad science is colliding with even worse politics.

The video I am speaking of is the one featuring the discredited scientist Judy Mikovits trashing Anthony Fauci, vaccines, and medical science more generally. Apparently, it is being turned into a documentary.

If you are wondering where the sentiments of this documentary lie, one only need to read this statement from the film’s website:

“Plandemic will expose the scientific and political elite who run the scam that is our global health system, while laying out a new plan; a plan that allows all of humanity to reconnect with healing forces of nature.” 

“Scientific and political elite” are buzz words often used by the far right.

I will be the first to admit there are very legitimate problems with our medical system and have gained many insights from people who have devoted their careers to better understand the various perverse forces that make our nation one of the sickest in the world. As a chronically-ill patient, I have seen first-hand the many problems in medicine. But I have also benefitted tremendously from scientific research, pharmaceuticals, and skilled physicians. I also take responsibility for my own health through diet and many other healing modalities, but would never rely exclusively on these (I tried and failed).

First, a disclosure about my views on vaccines

I am resistant to even go here, but the film is wrapped up in the vaccine debate. I find that many people are very closed-minded when it comes to vaccines – it seems there are only two choices: to be an anti-vaxxer or to be someone who shuts down reasonable concerns about vaccine safety and/or efficacy. Both sides tend to be strident. I am in neither camp; I am a scientist who likes to weigh the evidence. I am far from being an anti-vaxxer (I, along with my son, are somewhat fully vaccinated) but also see that there is a grey area and that certain vaccines could be made to be safer. I also believe it is likely that some people could have genetics and immunological conditions that predispose them to adverse responses (not referring to autism here, but immune dysfunction). That does not make me an anti-vaxxer but I have friends who see red when I dare to suggest that for some people, in some cases, vaccines might not be wise. I have a neuroimmune disease (ME/CFS) and need to proceed with caution with vaccines.

Mikovits, me, and ME

Back in my days of being treated for Lyme, I decided that I needed to address the possibility of chronic viral infections. I found two doctors that I was interested in seeing – Drs. Jose Montoya and Nancy Klimas (I ended up with Montoya). At that time, it was all the rage to treat Lyme patients with antiretroviral drugs used for HIV. To that end, my Lyme doc suggested I consider working with Judy Mikovits. Fortunately, she was unresponsive, sparing me of this rabbit hole (let alone it would be illegal for her to treat patients without a medical license).

Of course, I knew Mikovits’ name because she was the lead author on a 2009 paper published in journal Science that made a big splash in the scientific community: she, along with her colleagues asserted that ME/CFS – my disease – was associated with a virus called XMRV, a mouse retrovirus. Finally! The cause of this horrid disease was discovered! As someone who was recently diagnosed with this condition and told to go home and rot (essentially), I was thrilled.

Not so fast. The paper was retracted in 2011 after the results could not be replicated by multiple labs across the US. The conclusion was that the result was caused by lab contamination – oops. Heck, even Mikovits signed on to another the paper in 2011 with a laundry list of giants in virology and ME/CFS debunking the 2009 paper.

Around the time I was considering working with Mikovits, she published a book with her co-author called Plague. I read the book, finding it a bit mystifying that someone was going to such lengths to defend an idea that was so roundly rejected.

The story goes something like this: while working on the newly-established Whittemore-Peterson Institute (WPI) at the University of Nevada Reno, it became clear there were problems with her research and she was subsequently fired for fabricating data and failing to pass on a cell line to another researcher. She packed up her notebooks and headed to southern California. She was arrested for stealing the books and put in jail. She claims the notebooks were planted – really? As if ME/CFS research triggered such a high-stakes conspiracy? Was the arrest an overreaction? Quite likely, but it certainly gave her a major ax to grind because, after all, her reputation was destroyed. The fallout was immense – Dr. Daniel Peterson, a prominent ME/CFS clinician and researcher – demanded his name be removed because he did not want it associated with shoddy science. The WPI also languished at a time when research was needed even more, just as biopsychosocial researchers in the UK were trying to pin ME/CFS on psychiatric causes. It is hard to estimate how much ground we lost between the paper being retracted and WPI losing credibility.

Jon Cohen, a respected science writer, tells the story succinctly here.

Meanwhile, “Dr. Judy” as she likes to call herself – never mind she is not an MD – must have realized that she could find a sympathetic audience with the anti-vaxx crowd (as an aside – I am deeply distrustful of anyone who insists on being called Dr. when they “only” have a PhD – it is the very embodiment of elitism and insecurity). She asserts that some vaccines are unsafe because they are contaminated with…you guessed it…XMRV, an idea that has been debunked. She joined the likes of Andrew Wakefield as a shunned scientist and became the darling of the anti-vaxx world.

OK, setting my gripes about the damage she did to ME/CFS research, I have started to see a more sinister one emerge from the backwaters of the anti-vaxx world.

It appears that she is being promoted by far-right elements. She has been embraced by strange bedfellows in addition to anti-vaxxers – tea partiers, white supremacists, conspiracy theory peddlers, those generally rebelling against the “elites”, and Trump supporters seeking to discredit Anthony Fauci and anyone critical of his response to the pandemic.

One must ask why she is trying to discredit Fauci right now? It smacks of opportunism. Clearly, Fauci is in the headlines right now, so she likely saw her moment to re-litigate past grievances from the 1980s. Interestingly, her story about Fauci and WPI have similarities: “female scientist held under the thumb of the patriarchy afraid to know the whole truth.” Hmmm…could it be she is merely a crappy scientist and when confronted she is attempting to spin a different narrative that casts her in a more beneficial light? Only in a post-truth society would someone like Mikovits rise to prominence.

Fauci, ME/CFS, and COVID-19

I also have some mixed feelings about Fauci – but for very different reasons. He has been very dismissive of ME/CFS at NIH over the years – just ask Hillary Johnson, the author of Osler’s Web. Still, I can also see that he has been trying to thread a very fine needle while serving on Trump’s Coronavirus Task Force. He is one of the only people able to provide course-corrections when Trump veers off with insane ideas regarding the virus and how to respond to it. One must ask: where would be now if Fauci weren’t by his side? I dread to think.

I like to inhabit the grey spaces and am able to hold two seemingly disparate ideas at once: anger for how Fauci treated ME/CFS and appreciation for his attempts to speak truth to power during this crisis (while still feeling he could do more). Does he get everything right? Certainly not, but he is serving in a vital role. We do not live in a black and white world.

So, for those who are feeling intrigued by her interview that is circulating, I ask you to dig a little deeper into her background before believing her story. I also ask you this: does it make sense to listen to a bitter researcher shunned by the scientific community who is being propped up by the far-right causes?

In closing, I am not trying to conflate people who have concerns about vaccines with far-right elements such as white supremacists! But I do object to using shite science to advance a cause, and even more so, to people who use misuse science to promote other causes I abhor, such as white supremacy and self-styled militias who storm democratic institutions. I am all for free speech, but not for deceptive speech.

As virologist Vincent Rancaniello once said, trust science, not scientists.”

7 thoughts on “

  1. Love this email. I read all of your updates and never respond. Heck, i don’t even know if i can reply to this or if i need to comment on the website instead. But I always *almost* reply and never do. So here it is.

    I hope you’re doing alright, all things considered… keep the writings coming!

    Christopher Meyer

    Sent from my iPhone



  2. Caroline thank you for writing this! Especially when your energy is limited. I’ve already encountered today, good people (this a new group to deceive?) promoting her video.


  3. Lombardi (2009) was partially retracted, for political reasons. There have been other positive findings, eg Alter and Lo. Montoya found 85% of his samples positive for two or more retroviruses in the Multicentre study. Then Lipkin closed down the research and shortly after received a grant worth $34 million – some people find this unacceptable and suspicious!

    Lipkin, speaking in 2013: “We found retroviruses in 85 percent of the samples. Again, it is very difficult at this point to know whether or not this is clinically significant, and given the previous experience with retroviruses in Chronic Fatigue I am going to be very clear in telling you, although I am reporting this at present in Prof. Montoya’s samples, neither he nor we have concluded that there is a relationship to disease. I’ll repeat that one more time. We found retroviral sequences, but their relationship, at this time, to Chronic Fatigue Syndrome is unclear and, in fact, if I were to place bets and speculate, I would say that they are not going to pan out.”

    It is unfortunate that only right-wing outlets are interviewing Judy but I guess that’s what happens when great efforts are made to ruin a scientist’s reputation. See also the retroviral findings of Elaine de Freitas when she was at the Wistar Institute and how her career was ended rather dramatically.

    Vaccines have been found to be widely contaminated, eg the reports from Corvelva. I’d put a link in but fear my comment will not be published if I do.

    Here’s a summary of their findings for the MMRV (Priorix Tetra) vaccine:

    Summary table showing the results of analyses (Priorix tetra)

    1. Antigens – 3 out of 4 attenuated viruses were identified and sequenced. Rubella was detected in a very low number of copies. Varicella, mumps and measles viruses have higher mutations, probably derived from the attenuation of a large number of minor variants (quasipecies).

    2. Chemical Contaminants (signals) – 115-173 (29-43% known)

    3. Chemical toxins – NO

    4. Protein Contaminants – Sarcoplasmin calcium-binding protein, Actina e Vimentina

    5. Free peptide contaminants – NO

    6. Residual DNA/RNA deriving from cultured cells – Total amount of DNA: 1.7-3.7 μg/dose, the 80% of which was human (Human fetal DNA / RNA from the MRC-5 cell line). Other amount of DNA: chicken

    7. Adventitious viruses – Human endogenous retrovirus K, Equine infectious anemia virus, Avian leukosis virus, HERV-H/env62

    8. Other microbial contaminants – Proteobacteria, nematode-helminth

    9. Processing residues of genetic material – NO

    It would be nice to see someone challenging these findings and working towards establishing a way of producing and manufacturing safe and efficacious vaccines rather than continuing to attack people who have little to gain and much to lose in voicing their concerns regarding retroviral contamination etc. Cohen, who you quote above, said recombination was a 1 in 80 million chance before he changed his mind and said that recombinations were a daily event in our labs.

    We have a lot to consider, don’t you think?


    1. Hi Sarah – Thank you so much for reading and leaving such thoughtful comments. There is plenty of evidence, especially coming from Lipkin’s pathogen discovery methods, for retroviruses being present in this illness. It is unfortunate that COVID-19 is taking him and other ME/CFS researchers away from their research on this disease. The retraction of the 2009 paper combined with the 2011 paper specifically addresses the question of XMRV only. But there are many other retroviruses that could be a factor in this disease. And it could well be that some people respond well to ARVs, but some may not. I believe that there is not one single pathogen and no single drug that will resolve this illness (but I am deeply hopeful that Robert Naviaux is correct about Suramin). That said, I do strongly believe that EBV is my issue as I still am PCR+ even after pounding away on Vistide for 7 months – clearly, an infectious-disease approach is not the whole answer when immune dysfunction is at the core.

      I agree, it so very unfortunate that right-wing outlets are promoting Judy’s ideas. Sadly, when valid ideas are wrapped up in conspiracy theories and are politicized it shuts down meaningful discussion. Throwing out the baby in the bathwater comes to mind. And when far-right forces sign-on it makes it even harder to discuss these issues in a reasonable way as the left is immediately suspicious of foul play. So absurd. But that is the choice she made when she hitched her horse to those wagons.

      I dearly hope that someday we can move past the rancor and have meaningful efforts to make vaccines safer. Again, the politicization shuts that down thoughtful concerns. Sigh.

      Please do provide the link you reference above – I always welcome thoughtful discussion and so appreciate you taking the time to comment. Sending best thoughts.


      1. Thanks for replying Caroline and for encouraging discussion – most welcome in this hostile climate. Lipkin has been accused by Mady Hornig of numerous offences and the case is yet to be heard in court so he might not be involved in research in the future but Mady’s career has ended, as I understand it.

        If Judy had named XMRV an HGRV people might have found her findings a bit more palatable – nomenclature is important.

        I’m also very hopeful about Naviaux’s work and his SAT 1 project. It’s notable that the manufacturer of Suramin withdrew their support for his work and made the drug unavailable for him to study. The 30 minute video of his findings which is no longer available brought me to tears – non-verbal kids speaking within 2 weeks of taking a small amount of the drug compared to cancer sufferer dosages. And ME folk need just a fraction of the dose autistic kids were given, apparently.

        “Throwing out the baby in the bathwater comes to mind”… agreed!

        I fear Judy doesn’t have many choices when it comes to being published. She still has work from the 2012 period that remains unpublished. And she was working with leading lights such as Frank and Sandy Ruscetti.

        She is doing a lot of work in US vaccine courts – maybe worth researching if you have the time and energy. I should probably disclose that I am vaccine damaged (oral polio in 1980) and have been involved in UK research as an ME patient/ study participant (Coxsackie B for me – a common contaminant in polio vaccines).

        Here are the reports from Corvelva that I think are very revealing and truly frightening.

        Study on the chemical composition profile of Infanrix Hexa:

        “In Infanrix Hexa we found:
        ● chemical contamination from the manufacturing process or cross-contamination with other manufacturing lines;
        ● chemical toxins;
        ● bacterial peptide toxins;
        ● insoluble and indigestible macromolecule that reacts to the protein assay, but cannot be recognized by any protein databases.

        We have not found:
        ● Protein antigens of diphtheria toxoids, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, haemophylus influenzae B, Poliomyelitis 1-2-3;
        ● Formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde, phenoxyethanol, antibiotic residues indicated in the composition;”


        Metagenomic analysis report on vaccine samples by Corvelva, July 2018:

        “The results are alarming, on 7 types of vaccines, as many as 5 do not conform to the guidelines for the quantity of biological material, DNA or
        foreign RNA of human or animal origin, or for the presence of genetic mutations of the antigens!!!
        1. Priorix Tetra, GlaxoSmithKline – NOT CONFORMING
        2. Infanrix hexa, GlaxoSmithKline – NOT CONFORMING
        3. Measles live vaccine B.P., Poonawalla Group – NOT CONFORMING
        4. PolioInfanrix, GlaxoSmithKline – NOT CONFORMING
        5. Vivotif, PaxVax – NOT CONFORMING”


        Metagenomic analysis report on Gardasil 9:

        Presence of adventitious genetic material as DNA:
        ● Bacteria: The percentage is significant: 54% of the total DNA, the contamination can derive mainly from yeast culture, but also from
        contaminants in the laboratory; more blanks have been made to minimize the error due to environmental contamination, but we will have
        more accurate data when we make replicates with other laboratories. The bacterial DNA could interact with the adjuvant aluminum and
        cause allergies, inflammation and autoimmunity. Data to be confirmed.
        ● Human and Mouse DNA: their origin is not known! It may be that human DNA could instead be a cross-contamination from other cell
        lines used for the production of vaccines (it is a hypothesis). These DNA could interact with the adjuvant aluminum and cause
        inflammatory and autoimmune reactions.
        ● Adventitious viruses: fragment L1 of the HPV virus double strain DNA – comes from the antigen manufacturing process; it is a
        contaminant because it poses safety problems as it is not degraded and remains in the macrophages linked to the adjuvant aluminum for
        a long time; its biological effect is not fully known but it can probably be integrated into the host DNA, stimulate inflammation through
        the production of proinflammatory cytokines and autoimmune reactions (see research by Prof. Lee).
        ● Phages: they derive from the manufacturing process, they are adventitious contaminants of unknown hazards. Can antibodies against
        phages interact with bacteria in the intestinal bacterial flora? Can they integrate into the bacterial flora?
        ● Molluscum contagiosum virus: it belongs to the family Poxviridae, subfamily Chordopoxvirinae, genus Molluscipoxvirus. The term pox
        contained in the name of these viruses comes from the vesicles (poxes) produced be the smallpox virus.
        ● Retrovirus: potentially integrated into DNA; they can cause neoplastic transformation and mutations of the host genome; they derive
        from the contamination of human and mouse DNA, such as possible cross-contamination with other cell lines.

        ■ Mouse leukemia virus.
        ■ Human endogenous retrovirus K.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s