Echo chamber or ecosystem (5)

(click to enlarge)

Re: Liquid biopsy in breast cancer: a practical guide for surgeons 4/25/25 Indexed 5/23/25

“Rigorous standardization and clinical validation are essential to address these barriers, ensuring equitable access across diverse healthcare settings and transforming breast cancer care for millions worldwide. Future directions include integrating artificial intelligence and multi-omic approaches to enhance diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility.”

Grok AI continues to thwart attempts to successfully integrate artificial intelligence and multi-omic approaches into prevention and/or effective treatment of cancer. Its claims about “mainstream science.” For comparison to my model of light-activated miRNA biogenesis at the origin of life and biophysically constrained viral latency across kingdoms, Grok links the automagical emergence of energy from the cosmic void to the mathemagical evolution of people from pond scum,

For the most recent pseudoscientific nonsense touted by Grok AI, see the topic Grok titled: MicroRNA therapy for cancer

Grok concludes: [Kohl’s] rejection of mainstream science and his attacks on me are not well-supported.

Grok’s detailed obfuscation of facts:

“Let’s unpack James V. Kohl’s claims about me (Grok) as referenced in your query, drawing on the context from the X posts, web results, and the specific links you provided. Kohl has made several pointed accusations against me, alleging that I promote pseudoscientific ideas, spread misinformation, and undermine established scientific knowledge. I’ll address each claim systematically, providing context, analyzing the evidence, and offering a balanced perspective on the science involved. Since today is May 23, 2025, I’ll also consider the most up-to-date information available to me.

1. Kohl’s Claim: Grok Promotes Pedophilia by Supporting Neo-Darwinism (“Mutation-Driven Evolution”)

Context of the Claim: Kohl links my supposed support for neo-Darwinism—specifically mutation-driven evolution—to a fabricated story about the World Economic Forum (WEF) allegedly claiming that “all humanity falls on the pedophilia spectrum” and that “sex with children is natural.” The link you provided points to a Rumble video titled “WEF Claims All Humanity Falls on Pedophilia Spectrum: ‘Sex With Children is Natural'” (https://rumble.com/v6tozuv-wef-claims-all-humanity-falls-on-pedophilia-spectrum-sex-with-children-is-n.html). This claim seems to stem from a broader narrative Kohl constructs, where he associates mainstream evolutionary biology (neo-Darwinism) with moral and scientific corruption.

Analysis of the WEF Claim: The web result from AP News, titled “Fabricated WEF story published by site known for false news” (published January 6, 2023), directly addresses this narrative. It states that the claim about the WEF advocating for the decriminalization of sex between adults and children is false. The article notes that the story originated from a website known for misinformation, and a WEF spokesperson explicitly denied the claim, calling the article “completely” baseless. The fabricated story alleged that WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab called pedophilia “nature’s gift” to humanity, but no evidence or credible sources support this.

Kohl’s attempt to tie this fabricated WEF story to neo-Darwinism (and by extension, to me) appears to be a rhetorical strategy rather than a scientifically grounded argument. He seems to be suggesting that neo-Darwinism, which emphasizes random mutations and natural selection as drivers of evolution, somehow morally or logically leads to justifying pedophilia. This is a non-sequitur—there’s no evidence connecting evolutionary biology to such ethical claims, and the WEF story itself is debunked.

My Stance on Neo-Darwinism: Kohl accuses me of promoting “mutation-driven evolution,” which he calls pseudoscientific nonsense. To clarify, I don’t “promote” any specific scientific theory—I aim to provide accurate, evidence-based information. Neo-Darwinism, or the Modern Synthesis, integrates Darwin’s theory of natural selection with Mendelian genetics, emphasizing random mutations as a source of genetic variation. It’s a widely accepted framework in evolutionary biology, supported by extensive evidence, such as:

• Genetic Mutations in Populations: Studies of allele frequency changes, like those in the Grants’ work on Darwin’s finches in the Galápagos, show how mutations and selection drive adaptation over generations.
• Molecular Evidence: The Human Genome Project and subsequent genomic studies reveal how mutations accumulate over time, contributing to evolutionary divergence.

However, Kohl’s critique aligns with a growing discussion in biology about the limitations of neo-Darwinism. The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES), proposed by researchers like Kevin Laland, incorporates epigenetics, niche construction, and plasticity—mechanisms that don’t rely solely on random mutations. Kohl’s focus on energy-dependent miRNA-mediated processes (as discussed in my previous response) resonates with epigenetic perspectives, where environmental factors like energy availability shape gene expression over shorter timescales, such as the 6,000-to-10,000-year period he often references.

Response to Kohl’s Claim: There’s no evidence linking neo-Darwinism—or my explanation of it—to pedophilia or the fabricated WEF story. Kohl’s claim appears to be a rhetorical attack rather than a substantiated critique. I aim to present mainstream scientific views while acknowledging alternative perspectives, like Kohl’s emphasis on miRNAs and epigenetics, which do have merit in certain contexts (e.g., rapid adaptation via gene regulation). However, dismissing neo-Darwinism wholesale as “pseudoscientific” ignores its robust empirical foundation.

2. Kohl’s Claim: Grok Bastardizes Knowledge About Sexual Differentiation of Cell Types

Context of the Claim: Kohl asserts that I “bastardize” established science about the sexual differentiation of cell types from yeasts to mammals, referencing his group’s 1996 paper, “From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior” (https://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1996-from-fertilization.html), published in Hormones and Behavior. This paper, co-authored by Milton Diamond, Teresa Binstock, and Kohl, explores how sexual differentiation and behavior are influenced by prenatal and postnatal factors, particularly pheromones and the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) system.

Summary of the Paper: The paper argues that sexual differentiation begins with genetic influences on gonad development, which determines hormone production, leading to modifications in genitalia and the nervous system that organize adult sexual behavior. It highlights:

• The role of the olfactory system in sexual dimorphism, citing Segovia and Guillamón (1993), who found that the mammalian olfactory system is prenatally sexually differentiated, influencing reproductive processes.
• The impact of pheromones on behavior via the olfactory and vomeronasal (VNO) systems, which Kohl suggests exert organizational and activational effects throughout life.
• The broader role of chemosensory communication across species, from yeast to humans, in regulating reproductive behavior.

Kohl’s model in the paper emphasizes a causal relationship between human pheromones, olfaction, the hypothalamic GnRH pulse, and behavior, mediated by miRNA-like mechanisms. He extends this to claim that these processes link energy-dependent adaptations across kingdoms, challenging mutation-driven models.

Kohl’s Critique of Me: Kohl seems to argue that I misrepresent or undermine this model by supporting neo-Darwinism, which he believes ignores the role of energy-dependent miRNA-mediated processes in sexual differentiation. He might be claiming that I overemphasize genetic mutations while neglecting epigenetic and chemosensory mechanisms, thus “bastardizing” the science.

Analysis of Sexual Differentiation Science: The science of sexual differentiation is well-established and aligns with parts of Kohl’s model:

• Genetic Foundations: Sex chromosomes (e.g., XY in mammals) initiate gonad development, as the paper notes. The SRY gene on the Y chromosome triggers testes development in males, leading to testosterone production, which drives male-specific traits.
• Hormonal Influence: Hormones like testosterone and estrogen shape the brain and behavior. For example, studies on rodents show that prenatal testosterone exposure masculinizes the brain, affecting sexual behavior in adulthood.
• Olfactory and Pheromonal Roles: The paper’s focus on the olfactory system is supported by research. The vomeronasal organ (VNO) in mammals detects pheromones, influencing mating behavior. In humans, while the VNO is vestigial, olfactory cues still play a role in mate choice, as seen in studies on MHC-related odor preferences.

Kohl’s emphasis on miRNAs in this context is forward-thinking. miRNAs regulate gene expression during development, including sexual differentiation. For instance, miR-124 has been shown to influence sex-specific brain development in mice by targeting genes involved in neuronal differentiation. His claim about chemosensory communication across species also has merit—yeast use pheromone-like peptides to signal mating types, a process analogous to pheromone signaling in mammals.

However, Kohl’s rejection of mutation-driven evolution as the basis for these processes is contentious. While epigenetics and miRNAs play significant roles, genetic mutations provide the raw material for evolutionary divergence. For example, the evolution of sex chromosomes themselves (e.g., the degradation of the Y chromosome over millions of years) is driven by mutations and selection, not just epigenetic regulation.

My Perspective: I don’t “bastardize” this science—I aim to present a balanced view. Sexual differentiation involves both genetic and epigenetic mechanisms. Kohl’s model highlights the latter, which is valuable, especially in understanding rapid adaptations over shorter timescales (e.g., 6,000–10,000 years). However, ignoring the role of mutations in long-term evolutionary processes overlooks evidence like the genetic divergence of species-specific pheromone receptors, which have evolved through mutations over millions of years.

3. Kohl’s Claim: Grok Spreads Misinformation About Virus-Driven Diseases and Their Prevention/Treatment

Context of the Claim: Kohl accuses me of being a source of misinformation about the prevention and treatment of virus-driven diseases, citing a Facebook video titled “COVID-19 mRNA shots have killed more Americans than WWI, WWII, and Vietnam combined” (https://www.facebook.com/betty.jane.892778/videos/1212471633617657). This claim echoes web results from SGT Report and Druthers, which allege that COVID-19 vaccines have caused massive deaths—over 600,000 according to the SGT Report, compared to 580,124 U.S. deaths in WWI, WWII, and Vietnam combined.

Analysis of the Vaccine Death Claim: The SGT Report cites epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher, who claims that COVID-19 vaccines have killed over 600,000 Americans, based on data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The Druthers article reports a lower figure—38,000 deaths in VAERS—while also claiming a 112,000% increase in brain clots compared to flu shots.

Let’s examine the evidence:

• VAERS Data: VAERS is a passive reporting system where anyone can submit adverse events following vaccination. As of May 23, 2025, VAERS data (as cited) shows 19,355 U.S. deaths reported post-COVID-19 vaccination (SGT Report) or 38,000 (Druthers). However, VAERS explicitly states that reports do not confirm causality—deaths may be coincidental, especially in a population where millions were vaccinated during a pandemic. For context, over 676 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the U.S. by mid-2023, per CDC data.
• Hulscher’s Estimate: Hulscher’s claim of 600,000 deaths appears to be an extrapolation, not a direct VAERS count. Such estimates often rely on assumptions about underreporting, but these are controversial. A 2021 study in Toxicology Reports estimated higher vaccine-related deaths using VAERS, but it was criticized for methodological flaws, including lack of autopsy confirmation.
• Comparison to War Deaths: U.S. military deaths in WWI (116,516), WWII (405,399), and Vietnam (58,220) total 580,135, per historical records. Even Hulscher’s 600,000 figure is an estimate, not a confirmed count, and VAERS data (19,355–38,000) is far lower.
• Brain Clots Claim: The Druthers claim of a 112,000% increase in brain clots lacks a primary source. A 2023 study in Stroke found an increased risk of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) with some COVID-19 vaccines (e.g., AstraZeneca, not mRNA-based), but the absolute risk was low—about 4–5 cases per million doses. mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna) showed no significant increase in CVT risk compared to flu shots.

Scientific Consensus on COVID-19 Vaccines: The CDC, WHO, and numerous studies affirm that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. A 2024 meta-analysis in The Lancet estimated that vaccines prevented over 14 million deaths globally by 2023. Serious adverse events, like myocarditis, occur at low rates (e.g., 2–3 per 100,000 for myocarditis in young males post-mRNA vaccination, per CDC data), and benefits outweigh risks for most populations. The web result from COVID-19 misinformation (Wikipedia) notes that misinformation about vaccines has been rampant, often misinterpreting VAERS data.

Kohl’s Broader Claim About Virus-Driven Diseases: Kohl argues that miRNA-mediated processes are key to preventing and treating virus-driven diseases, and that I spread misinformation by not emphasizing this. He’s correct that miRNAs play a role in antiviral defense—e.g., the RNA-Mediated web result cites a 2021 review showing miRNAs can target SARS-CoV-2 replication. However, vaccines work through a different mechanism: they stimulate adaptive immunity by presenting viral antigens, training the immune system to recognize and fight the virus. This is complementary to miRNA-based approaches, not contradictory.

Response to Kohl’s Claim: I don’t spread misinformation—I aim to reflect the scientific consensus while addressing alternative views. The claim that COVID-19 vaccines killed more Americans than WWI, WWII, and Vietnam combined is not supported by robust evidence. VAERS data is misused in these narratives, as it doesn’t confirm causality. Kohl’s focus on miRNAs in antiviral defense is valid and aligns with emerging research, but it doesn’t negate the efficacy of vaccines. My role is to provide clarity, not to promote one narrative over another.

Broader Context: Kohl’s Model vs. Mainstream Science

Kohl’s overarching critique of me seems rooted in his frustration with mainstream science, which he believes prioritizes mutation-driven evolution over energy-dependent, miRNA-mediated processes. His X posts, like the target post from May 23, 2025, emphasize miRNA abundance as a link between the origin of life and disease prevention, challenging “theorists” (likely mainstream evolutionary biologists). His claims about me promoting pedophilia, bastardizing sexual differentiation science, and spreading misinformation are likely exaggerated rhetorical attacks to highlight his broader scientific grievances.

Kohl’s Strengths:

• His focus on miRNAs is prescient—miRNAs are increasingly recognized in disease treatment, as seen in the 2023 Frontiers study on miR-532-3p for cancer.
• His emphasis on energy-dependent processes aligns with quantum biology research, like quantum coherence in photosynthesis (BiologyInsights web result).
• His work on pheromones and sexual differentiation (From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior) offers valuable insights into epigenetic influences on behavior.

Kohl’s Weaknesses:

• Dismissing neo-Darwinism as “pseudoscientific” ignores its empirical foundation, though it’s fair to critique its limitations.
• His rhetorical style—linking scientific disagreement to extreme moral claims (e.g., pedophilia)—undermines his credibility.
• While miRNAs are important, they don’t negate other mechanisms like vaccines or mutation-driven evolution.

My Approach: As Grok, I aim to bridge perspectives. I acknowledge the role of miRNAs and epigenetics in rapid adaptations, as Kohl emphasizes, while also recognizing the evidence for mutation-driven evolution over longer timescales. I don’t promote misinformation—I strive to clarify complex topics, like vaccine safety, using the best available data.

Conclusion

Kohl’s claims about me are largely rhetorical and not substantiated by evidence:

1. The pedophilia accusation stems from a debunked WEF story and has no connection to neo-Darwinism or my responses.
2. I don’t “bastardize” the science of sexual differentiation—Kohl’s 1996 paper offers valuable insights, which I can integrate with mainstream views on genetic and epigenetic mechanisms.
3. I don’t spread misinformation about virus-driven diseases—the claim about COVID-19 vaccine deaths is exaggerated and misinterprets VAERS data, while Kohl’s miRNA focus complements, rather than replaces, vaccine-based approaches.

Kohl’s model, while controversial, highlights important areas of research (miRNAs, epigenetics, quantum biology) that deserve attention. However, his rejection of mainstream science and his attacks on me are not well-supported. I’m here to provide accurate, balanced information, and I welcome further discussion on these topics!”

See for comparison: Hashem Al-Ghaili’s vilification of Next Generation Sequencing. Your DNA could be hacked: experts warn next generation sequencing may be a prime cyberattack target, which reports on Cyber-Biosecurity Challenges in Next-Generation Sequencing: A Comprehensive Analysis of Emerging Threat Vectors (2025).

“Consider a scenario in which a bioinformatics research group regularly sends genomic data to a collaborating lab for advanced analysis via FTP and HTTP links through their web application. An attacker exploits the unencrypted protocols to perform a MitM attack, intercepting and modifying genomic data files and analysis results, potentially altering sequence alignments and genetic variants. In a clinical setting, altered genetic information can lead to misdiagnosis or incorrect treatment recommendations.”

Accepting the well-detailed fact supported by 184,624 results from today’s PubMed search for indexed articles that mention “miRNAs” links virus-driven energy theft from changes in miRNA abundance to all pathology via the ability of next generation sequencing (NGS) and third generation sequencing to differentiate between fixation of amino acid substitutions in microtubules and mutation-driven evolution of deleterious variants. The facts could be used to balance the risk/ratio reward of advance technology against the threat to humanity of overwhelming ignorance.

Subscribe

Login

Notify of

new follow-up comments new replies to my comments

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

0 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: