
“I Believe in Science”
Science is a method, not a belief system. From Tamiflu to past medical failures, this piece asks what happens when consensus replaces scrutiny and evidence.
Most people who lead with a statement of faith in science have never read a scientific study.
They’ve never read the protocols that inform medical guidelines.
Never read internal company documents filed in court proceedings, or expert reports, or case studies.
They get their “science” from the news, or regulator statements, or government spokespeople.
Science is a method. They don’t believe in science.
They believe in the High Priests who pass down The Science™️, which they receive with the same reverence that a good Catholic receives the sacrament, and that is why no amount of evidence will convince them to abandon their belief in the safety and effectiveness of any number of commercial products unless the about-face is first sanctioned and circulated by said priests.
When ‘Science’ Becomes a Belief System
I was reminded of the religious nature of adherence to scientific consensus when I shared with friends recently that I was reading the book How Merck and Drug Regulators Hid Serious Harms of the HPV Vaccines by Peter Gøtzsche.
Not only is Gøtzsche a Danish physician, medical researcher, and co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration, he was an expert witness in the case Robi v. Merck & Co., brought by Californian woman Jennifer Robi, who alleged that the HPV vaccine Gardasil caused her heart conditions, nerve pain, and permanent disablement. (The case has been discontinued after Merck agreed to settle over 200 Gardasil-related suits for around USD $50 million.)
However, I never got to sharing this information because I was informed in a torrent of one-way arguments that vaccines have saved billions of lives, that this friend ‘believes in science,’ and that any evidence I did put forward would be untrue anyway.
“Ok.”
That’s all you can say to a religious zealot.
The Danger of Assumptions in Medicine
The recent discovery that the antiviral oseltamivir (brand name Tamiflu) may INCREASE mortality for critically ill patients compared to taking nothing at all will do nothing to dent this kind of belief.
Incredibly, in the 20+ years since Tamiflu was approved by regulators, no one ever ran a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to see how it fared for the sickest patients of all.
Everyone just extrapolated from research showing that it helped to alleviate a mild flu, assuming that it would therefore also provide benefit to patients in ICU. Based on this assumption, Tamiflu was added to hospital guidelines, prescribed by doctors and stockpiled by governments.
But that assumption was wrong — dead wrong — if the REMAP-CAP trial finding is correct.
The Monash University study found that in patients with severe influenza, around 20% of those who received Tamiflu died within 90 days, compared to around 14% of those who did not receive the drug.
The researchers said they went public with the “unexpected” result while still in pre-print phase (with the peer-review process not yet complete) because of the urgency of the public health implications. The Chief Health Officer has already instructed Australian ICUs not to prescribe Tamiflu to critically ill patients.
Science Can Correct Itself — Eventually
In one sense, this is science self-correcting. However, it’s 25 years too late because the gaps in the science were papered over with incorrect assumptions.
I guess that’s another big ‘oops’ to add to the list:
- DDT
- Thalidomide
- DES
- Asbestos
- Oxycontin
- PFAS
- Fen-phen
- Johnson & Johnson talc
- Pelvic mesh
- Vioxx
- Zantac
- Lead-based paint
- Metal-on-metal hip implants
- Mercury teething powder
- Cigarettes
- Covid shots
There are more, but that will do.
If there’s anything to learn from a list like this, it’s that science is corruptible and, even when not corrupted, science is not static.
Science is a tool to serve us — not a god that we serve.
___
Republished with thanks to Dystopian Down Under. Image courtesy of Adobe.
4 Comments
Leave A Comment
Recent Articles:
12 October 2026
4.6 MINS
Learn how journalists use loaded language, selective quotes and misleading headlines to shape public opinion, using a controversial report about James and Joanna Howe as a case study.
12 October 2026
3.1 MINS
The proposed livestream of Nidal Hasan’s execution has reignited debate over justice, deterrence and public accountability, with critics comparing American justice to ISIS propaganda.
12 October 2026
3.7 MINS
An EU court case over baptismal records could pit data protection laws against religious freedom, raising serious questions about whether governments can compel churches to erase sacramental history.
9 October 2026
1.8 MINS
Pen Power Australia has been busy confronting antisemitism and double standards, lodging letters, pursuing accountability and celebrating several important wins along the way.
9 October 2026
3.3 MINS
New South Wales healthcare workers who object to abortion and voluntary assisted dying face growing pressure, raising serious questions about conscience rights, employment and moral injury.
8 October 2026
3.6 MINS
John Anderson warns that Australia’s decline is rooted in spiritual and cultural disintegration, calling for a recovery of Christian foundations, social cohesion and national purpose.
8 October 2026
1.6 MINS
A blackout at Australia’s $150 million Pre-COP climate summit in Fiji delivered an awkward lesson in energy reliability to delegates preaching the renewable transition.






Excellent article. There are many secular beliefs, not only certain attitudes to science, now coalescing into religious beliefs to satisfy the religion of humanism which elevates man to the status of god and denies the reality of the actual God who created everything including His moral laws. Humanism declares that mankind can solve all problems in the world including. unbelievably, worldwide climate, as well as pandemics through novel and rushed vaccines, and disturbingly many moral issues with the solution that humanism applies is for governments to legislate abhorrent policies which deny reality in order to satisfy certain minorities while allowing third parties to sue in the courts those who speak common sense and oppose these abhorrent policies.
Absolutely right. There’s nothing more toxic than humanism
A brilliant piece! Thank you for addressing this mind control slogan . It’s sad that this is the stance of many Christians who don’t seem to research or question anything , and fail to see it as idolatry.
Thank you Rebekah for another very good professional article