Is it possible to release a medical product without providing informed consent to the one receiving it? Like you, a year ago I would have replied with a resounding NO! However, after having been engaged in litigation against a state agency to provide informed consent, the surprising answer is apparently, yes… After suing the Virginia Department of Health under state informed consent statutes it appears impossible to establish legal…

Regardless of this clear error in judgement, there is a post-mortem that must be done in order to determine how best to move forward on a strategic level, aside from the tactical option of filing a notice to appeal before the new year; which is completely dependent on funds, or some other legal organization offering their assistance to continue.

Section 564, Informed Consent & MCM’s

One of the most surprising revelations of the case was the use of Section 564 of the FDCA as a defense to a suit for informed consent. I have previously published a link and excerpts of a “slip opinion” memorandum written to the Office of the President of the United States and may be viewed here –https://dockek.substack.com/p/section-564-slip-opinion-memorandum.

The most important revelation I had when finding a way through this defense was that previous to Section 564’s insertion into the 2004 National Defense Authorization Act it was illegal to distribute a “Medical Counter-Measure” (mcm) to the general public. Previous to Section 564 the only “tool” the military had to react to the release of a pathogen/disease of public health threat were drugs designated as “investigational”. Section 564 essentially created a carve-out for Emergency Use Authorization by legally designating mcm’s as “non-investigational”. By derivation, any non-investigational product released to counter a public health threat is being released beyond the requirement to research it.

If a non-investigational product is being released without any requirement to research it, then human research statutes regarding informed consent are outside the scope of Section564’s requirements. The only thing Section564 requires are industry provided “facts sheets”, and the extent to which benefits and risks are known and Unknown. With this being the current state of affairs what recourse is there to receive notice the spike protein is a biologic toxin?

Sovereign Immunity & Administrative Process

The most important discovery in my case was finding a way to overcome the concept of “sovereign immunity”. Sovereign immunity refers to the fact that the government cannot be sued without its consent.

“The Commonwealth and its agencies are immune from liability in the absence of an express constitutional or statutory waiver of sovereign immunity,” and such a waiver “will not be implied from general statutory language but must be explicitly and expressly stated in the statute.” Gray v. Va. Sec’y of Transp., 276 Va. 93, 102 (2008)

Sovereign Immunity is a near impossible hurdle to overcome when suing the government. However, while preparing for oral arguments the words “must be explicitly and expressly stated in the statute” really stuck out as the ruling points to the existence of statute. In this case, the Virginia Administrative Process Act, and specifically Va Code 2.2-4002, Exemptions from chapter generally, #22 states:

The Board of Health in promulgating the list of diseases that shall be reported to the Department of Health pursuant to § 32.1-35 …

All states have an administrative process or procedure law in which aspects of sovereign immunity are specifically waived. You may search your own states statutes in order to determine what the government must do if presented with a request to do so… The Virginia Department of Health does NOT have sovereign immunity for claims made under § 32.1-35.

The title of § 32.1-35 is “List and reports of diseases and dangerous microbes and pathogens.”

”The Board shall promulgate from time to time a list of diseases, including diseases caused by exposure to any toxic substance as defined in § 32.1-239 and including diseases that may be caused by exposure to an agent or substance that has the potential for use as a weapon, that shall be required to be reported. The Board shall also promulgate from time to time a list of dangerous microbes and pathogens that shall be required to be reported by laboratories. The Board may classify such diseases, microbes and pathogens and prescribe the manner and time of such reporting.”

The statutes referenced here were directly communicated to the Virginia Department of health related to an “unusual occurrence of public health threat” as defined by the very “list of diseases” § 32.1-35 required the board to define as per 12VAC5-90-10, which was the administrative code I cited in my initial email, and completely ignored in the judge’s final ruling…

While galivanting along the meadows of “legal land” it appears I may have found the foundation to move forward, as well as a distillation of how others may present this information to local councils, boards of health, private doctors and pharmacies, hospitals, public school boards, etc. in order to place them in a position where compulsory reporting is required of them by law, and which may NOT be demurred/dismissed on the grounds of “Sovereign Immunity”.

The Checklist Explained

I will give you the long form here first, and will conclude with a “Checklist” you may use to guide you in notifying others and achieving the result of having the S1 subunit of the spike protein for SARS-CoV-2 alpha strain B.1.1.7 legally designated a biologic toxin, agent, poison, etc. as defined in your own state statutes.

Viruses of public health threat require reporting to local health departments. In addition to reporting of the viruses themselves, their sequelae, which are pathogenic results of viruses themselves, but separate from infection, such as Long Covid, must also be reported. Whether the word is required, compulsory, mandated, etc. it will be a clear indication the requirement to report will supersede any discretion of the person to not report it up the chain.

Departments responsible for the investigation of diseases and their origin would also necessarily be compelled to acknowledge the reported information. Once the reported information on the biological toxicity of the spike protein is officially acknowledged, then pressure to update informed consent may ensue.

How do you forward information on the biologic toxicity of the spike protein in order to have it legally recognized as a toxin, and therefore anything making it in the body a toxic substance? It all starts with Long Covid.

Long Covid is the direct sequelae of a disease of public health threat. Being a direct sequelae of a disease of public health threat means compulsory reporting related to the disease of public health threat also apply to its sequelae.

Legal disabilities afford them special protections under EEOC, Human Rights, and anti-discrimination statutes. Long Covid is defined as a disability by the US Department of Health and Human Services. Link https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/civil-rights-covid19/guidance-long-covid-disability/index.html#footnote10_0ac8mdc

The causative agent for Long Covid is also the causative agent of a disability. Dr. Bruce Patterson has outlined the diagnostic criterion for Long Covid, as well as a treatment that has proven successful for over 30,000 patients. He presented his findings Georgetown University on Diagnosis and Treatment of Long COVID and may be viewed by clicking here.

He found the S1 subunit for the spike protein to be the causative agent for Long Covid.

The S1 subunit being the causative agent for Long Covid means the S1 subunit causes disabilities.

Resia Pretorius has discovered the S1 subunit of the spike protein for SARS-CoV-2 may induce a pathogenic “fibrinogenic” response sui generis. Structural changes to β and γ fibrin(ogen), complement 3, and prothrombin caused these proteins to be substantially resistant to trypsinization, in the presence of spike protein S1. Trypsinization is the process a cell uses to breaks down proteins and dissociate adherent cells from the vessel in which they are being cultured. Essentially it is a biologic glue causing the formation of syncytial clots that cannot be dissolved, in case you were wondering what they are pulling out of the people that die suddenly…

In addition to Dr. Bruce Patterson, Resia Pretorius’ work, the American Foundation for Informed Consent’s report titled S1-Spike Protein Causes PASC, Cytokine Storm, & Long COVID provides a step by step cascade of pathologies associated with the S1 subunit of the spike protein. The biologic report is currently in 4 parts and may be viewed by clicking here.

There are a number of sections of the spike protein able to cause its own set of pathologies. However, the specific section all literature points when they say the pathology of the spike protein becomes “activated”; the Furin Cleavage Site, where the S1 and S2 subunits are separated. The reason this area is of such interest is because it is the reverse compliment for a human codon optimized MSH3 class oncology gene matching Hermansky-Pudlak Syndrome.

Hermansky-Pudlak syndrome (HPS) is a rare, hereditary disorder that consists of two characteristics: decreased pigmentation (albinism) with visual impairment, and blood platelet dysfunction with prolonged bleeding. Some patients have lung fibrosis, colitis, or an abnormal storage of a fatty-like substance (ceroid lipofuscin) in various tissues of the body. With the revelation this gene is the reverse compliment of an oncology gene it would be impossible to say anything creating it in the body isn’t carcinogenic.

With these three citations anyone may be armed with all they need in order to present information the S1 subunit for the spike protein causes disabilities, is a direct sequelae of disease of public health threat, and a biologic pathogenic toxin by definition. This information will eventually be more effective when those compelled to act upon sequelae to those they feel would be compelled to act upon it. Health Departments, Disease Control Centers, Departments of Epidemiology, Hospitals, Private Family Doctors & Pharmacies, laboratories, and others involved in the healthcare field

The Checklist

1. Compulsory Reporting – unusual occurrence of disease of public health threat
2. Departments duty in Detecting, investigating, and preventing the spread of disease
3. Informed Consent on the local level as applied to medical procedures
   • Long Covid – is direct sequelae of disease of public health threat
   • Disability – Long Covid is Defined by HHS as a disability –
   • Biologic Toxin – Spike protein is causative agent of Long Covid/disability
     1. Bruce Patterson – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33186704/ – https:// youtu.be/h2xyWiMS2Q0
     2. Resia Pretorius – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8380922/ – https:// youtu.be/fflt95jPUYM
     3. American Foundation for Informed Consent – https://fwdquestionshere.com/
        • Health Departments – Disease Control/Epidemiology
        • Hospitals
        • Private Doctors & Pharmacies

How to Target Distribution of materials in order to effect legal designation of the spike protein as a biologic toxin.

Please consider becoming a member to my Substack or donating to the GiveSendGo for the American Foundation for Informed Consent so I may continue this work and arming others with actions they may take to effect change on a local level.

https://www.givesendgo.com/AmericanFoundationforInformedConsent

Many Blessings, Antony Pena aka @DocKek

The post Informed Consent is Dead by DocKek appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

Hello, My name is Spartacus, and I’ve had enough.

We have been forced to watch America and the Free World spin into inexorable decline due to a bio-warfare attack.

We, along with countless others, have been victimized and gaslit by propaganda and psychological warfare operations being conducted by an unelected, unaccountable Elite against the American people and our allies.

Our mental and physical health have suffered immensely over the course of the past year and a half.

We have felt the sting of isolation, lock-down, masking, quarantines, and other completely nonsensical acts of healthcare theater that have done absolutely nothing to protect the health or well-being of the public from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Now, we are watching the medical establishment inject literal poison into millions of our fellow Americans without so much as a fight.

We have been told that we will be fired and denied our livelihoods if we refuse to vaccinate. This was the last straw.

We have spent thousands of hours analyzing leaked footage from Wuhan, scientific papers from primary sources, as well as the paper trails left by the medical establishment.

What we have discovered would shock anyone to their core.

First, we will summarize our findings, and then, we will explain them in detail. References will be placed at the end.

Summary:

• COVID-19 is a blood and blood vessel disease. SARS-CoV-2 infects the lining of human blood vessels, causing them to leak into the lungs.

• Current treatment protocols (e.g. invasive ventilation) are actively harmful to patients, accelerating oxidative stress and causing severe VILI (ventilator-induced lung injuries). The continued use of ventilators in the absence of any proven medical benefit constitutes mass murder.

• Existing countermeasures are inadequate to slow the spread of what is an aerosolized and potentially wastewater-borne virus, and constitute a form of medical theater.

• Various non-vaccine interventions have been suppressed by both the media and the medical establishment in favor of vaccines and expensive patented drugs.

• The authorities have denied the usefulness of natural immunity against COVID-19, despite the fact that natural immunity confers protection against all of the virus’s proteins, and not just one.

• Vaccines will do more harm than good. The antigen that these vaccines are based on, SARS-CoV- 2 Spike, is a toxic protein. SARS-CoV-2 may have ADE, or antibody-dependent enhancement; current antibodies may not neutralize future strains, but instead help them infect immune cells. Also, vaccinating during a pandemic with a leaky vaccine removes the evolutionary pressure for a virus to become less lethal.

• There is a vast and appalling criminal conspiracy that directly links both Anthony Fauci and Moderna to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

• COVID-19 vaccine researchers are directly linked to scientists involved in brain-computer interface (“neural lace”) tech, one of whom was indicted for taking grant money from China.

• Independent researchers have discovered mysterious nano-particles inside the vaccines that are not supposed to be present.• The entire pandemic is being used as an excuse for a vast political and economic transformation of ”Western Society” that will enrich the already rich and turn the rest of us into serfs and untouchables.

End of Part 1 – Coming soon, Part 2

Spartacast Episode 4 – https://substack.com/saved/post/70472675

Hey guys, Spartacus, here for a fourth Spartacast.

I’ve spent the past few weeks working on various projects while growing increasingly enraged at the reports I’ve seen. The vaccine-injured are growing in number. They are being given very little consideration by public officials…

The post Covid19 – The Spartacus Letter Pt.1 appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

By Guest Author – Spartacus

One of the biggest problems I have with these vaccines is that they’re claiming that 2P Spike is safe for cells to produce simply because it has those proline substitutions that lock it in the prefusion conformation.

Of course, the  CDC has stated that the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is harmless, which assures that current Covid-19 vaccines would be safe.

I’ve gotten into shouting matches on Twitter.

I asked people what they thought the final fate of the protein was, and they couldn’t come up with a straight answer.

None, zip, nada! They thought that the 2P Spike was completely inert and immune to any kind of proteolytic cleavage.

Proteolysis is when enzymes cut a protein up like a pair of scissors.

Proteolysis Defined

Proteolysis is the breakdown of proteins into smaller polypeptides or amino acids. 

Proteolysis in organisms serves many purposes; for example, digestive enzymes break down proteins in food to provide amino acids for the organism, while proteolytic processing of a polypeptide chain after its synthesis may be necessary for the production of an active protein.

It is also important in the regulation of some physiological and cellular processes including apoptosis, as well as preventing the accumulation of unwanted or misfolded proteins in cells.

Consequently, abnormality in the regulation of proteolysis can cause disease. – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proteolysis

We know that when Spike is exposed to neutrophil elastase, which is an enzyme commonly released by neutrophils as an inflammatory reaction, it breaks up into small peptide fragments that are each, individually, amyloidogenic.

Alzheimer’s

Amyloid plaques are what you see in Alzheimer’s. Please see following paper – https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.2c03925

COVID-19 involves iron dysregulation, oxidative stress, and amyloidosis, and it’s because of the virus’s highly toxic proteins.

That combination is basically an inducer of aging and aging-related disease.

Cosmic Radiation

It’s exactly like an astronaut being exposed to cosmic radiation, biologically speaking.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7861125/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0753332221000135

https://cardiab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12933-022-01623-4

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-29801-8

Combination of Effects

The vax might not induce that precise effect; that inflammatory profile is seen in COVID-19, and it’s very likely due to a combination of effects from the virus. The Spike has some more specific negative effects, particularly endothelial toxicity.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8538996/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7547916/

WHY???

The real question here is why many of these same tests have not been performed with 2P Spike and cell cultures to see if it shares the same negative effects as the Spike from the virus.

There’s just a total absence of that sort of research.

They’re basically assuming, based on nothing, that it is safe and inert.

About The Author: Spartacus

Spartacus is known to us as the main contributor at The ICENI Bulletins.

The ICENI believe that crimes of unimaginable proportions have taken place, upon the good people of earth.

Also that these crimes are still ongoing, involving high-level public officials, intelligence agencies, and their pharma pawns.

The investigation continues. The perpetrators of this criminal conspiracy are not above the law, nor are they beyond the reach of public scrutiny. – Spartacus

For more information, please visit – https://iceni.substack.com/.

To listen to the podcasts from Spartacus, please visit – https://iceni.substack.com/podcast

The post Cosmic Radiation and The ”Spike” – Poison??? appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

How do you ask for Informed Consent on the Biologic Toxicity of the Spike Protein?

Guest Author: DocKek

1. When I win I will have established “legal standing” for further suit.

2. When the declaratory judgement is granted it will be the first instance in the nation where the spike protein were to be legally defined as a biologic toxin and everything making it in the body a toxic substance;

3. with further notice being mandated to anyone receiving the inoculation of the possibility of a “health-care associated infection” related to long covid.

4. game. set. match.

Legal Basis

This is meant to be a background on the legal basis for bringing suit for Informed Consent against any that would deny it.

In Virginia. Informed Consent is defined as “providing policies allowing knowing and voluntary agreement, without undue inducement or ANY ELEMENT of force, fraud, deceit, duress, or other form of constraint or coercion, of a person who is capable of exercising free power of choice.”

Shall Include

The post Biologic Toxicity of the Spike Protein? appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

Abstract and Figures

Background and objectives Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the thalamus is a promising therapeutic alternative for treating medically refractory Tourette syndrome (TS).

However, few human studies have examined its mechanism of action. Therefore, the networks that mediate the therapeutic effects of thalamic DBS remain poorly understood.

Methods:

Five participants diagnosed with severe medically refractory TS underwent bilateral thalamic DBS stereotactic surgery.

Intraoperative fMRI characterized the blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) response evoked by thalamic DBS and determined whether the therapeutic effectiveness of thalamic DBS, as assessed using the Modified Rush Video Rating Scale test, would correlate with evoked BOLD responses in motor and limbic cortical and subcortical regions.

Results:

Our results reveal that thalamic stimulation in TS participants has wide-ranging effects that impact the frontostriatal, limbic, and motor networks.

Thalamic stimulation induced suppression of motor and insula networks correlated with motor tic reduction, while suppression of frontal and parietal networks correlated with vocal tic reduction. These regions mapped closely to major regions of interest (ROI) identified in a nonhuman primate model of TS.

Conclusions:

Overall, these findings suggest that a critical factor in TS treatment should involve modulation of both frontostriatal and motor networks, rather than be treated as a focal disorder of the brain.

Using the novel combination of DBS-evoked tic reduction and fMRI in human subjects, we provide new insights into the basal ganglia-cerebellar-thalamo-cortical network-level mechanisms that influence the effects of thalamic DBS.

Future translational research should identify whether these network changes are cause or effect of TS symptoms.

Please open and read PDF here – Global_network_modulation_during_thalamic_stimulation

The post Global Network Modulation appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

There is a near consensus view that SARS-CoV-2 has a natural zoonotic origin; however, several characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 taken together are not easily explained by a natural zoonotic origin hypothesis.

These include: a low rate of evolution in the early phase of transmission; the lack of evidence of recombination events; a high pre-existing binding to human ACE2; a novel furin cleavage site insert, and high human and mouse peptide mimicry.

Initial assumptions against a laboratory origin, by contrast, have remained unsubstantiated.

Furthermore, over a year after the initial outbreak in Wuhan, there is still no clear evidence of zoonotic transfer from a bat or intermediate species. Given the immense social and economic impact of this pandemic, identifying the true origin of SARS-CoV-2 is fundamental to preventing future outbreaks.

The search for SARS-CoV-2’s origin should include an open and unbiased inquiry into a possible laboratory origin.

Introduction:

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel Betacoronavirus of lineage B (subgenus Sarbecovirus) and the causative agent of Covid-19, the first detected cases of which were identified in Wuhan in December 2019 (Huang et al., 2020).

The near-consensus view of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is a natural zoonosis (Zhu N. et al., 2020, Wu, F. et al., 2020, Zhou P. et al., 2020).

Bats are thought to be the natural reservoir for SARS-related coronaviruses (SARS-r CoVs) (Li et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2006) and have been identified as the ancestral source from which severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) evolved (Janies, 2008; Sheahan, 2008).

Not Been Established

While several intermediate host species have been proposed as the zoonotic source for SARS-CoV-2 (Xiao et al., 2020; Lam et al., 2020; Zhang, T. et al., 2020; Zhou and Shi, 2020), the source of direct bat to human, or intermediate animal to human zoonotic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has not been established.

An alternative hypothesis, that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from a laboratory, has been widely dismissed (Rasmussen, 2020), yet very few papers counter this theory with data analysis (Andersen et al., 2020; Liu SL. et al., 2020; Graham and Baric, 2020).

Here, we address the main arguments in support of a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2, and outline the various points which support the alternative, that a laboratory origin is still a valid possibility that should not be discounted.

Prevent Future Pandemics

To help prevent future viral pandemics, it is of pivotal importance to identify the source of the virus and this is only possible with an unbiased analysis of all data available.

We couple this work with calls from recent opinion pieces and comparative studies questioning a zoonotic origin (Sousa, 2020; Sirotkin & Sirotkin 2020; Relman, 2020; Segreto & Deigin 2020; Butler, 2020; Sallard et al., 2021) via a review of the latest literature, and propose an alternative to the natural zoonosis hypothesis.

Please visit the ResearchGate paper below –

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349125078_An_open_debate_on_SARS-CoV-2’s_proximal_origin_is_long_overdue

The post Debate on SARS-CoV-2’s appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

Ask yourself a question; What possible reason, and why is there an ingredient in the Jassen Covid Vaccine, which shouldn’t be there?

As per the government’s own FDA website,

https://www.fda.gov/media/146305/download?utm%E2%80%94medium=email&utm%E2%80%94source=govdelivery

They answer our query.

WHAT ARE THE INGREDIENTS IN THE JANSSEN COVID-19 VACCINE?

The Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine includes the following ingredients: recombinant, eplication-incompetent adenovirus type 26 expressing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, citric acid monohydrate, trisodium citrate dihydrate, ethanol, 2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HBCD), polysorbate-80, sodium chloride.

What We Have Discovered

During our third trip to the undisclosed laboratory in Japan, Dr. Kevin McCarin Ph.D. was able to get right to the business of seeking answers to very serious questions. What exactly is in the vaccines and what does it mean?

But before you read about what we found, please read this quote from the FDA’s very own document.

WHAT IS THE JANSSEN COVID-19 VACCINE?

The Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine is an ”unapproved” vaccine that ”may” prevent COVID-19.

Under an EUA, Emergency Use Authorization , the FDA has authorized the emergency use of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine to prevent COVID-19 in individuals 18 years of age and older for whom other FDA-authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccines are not accessible or clinically appropriate, and in individuals 18 years of age and older who elect to receive the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine because they would otherwise not receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

TIME: 16:04:09 SEM 2022/08/10 1 HV [kV] Mag WD [mm] keV 30x 14.2 mm

Further details and findings will be published at a later date.

The post We Found Something! appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

Recent testing (SEM/EDX analysis) on vaccines conducted by Dr. Kevin W. McCairn Ph.D. finds that both Pfizer & Moderna vaccines failed to register elemental signatures for Nitrogen and Phosphorous!

Normal mRNA contains significant quantities of Nitrogen which forms Purines ((A)denine, (G)uanine) & Pyrimadines (Uracil, Cytosine), which should be linked to a sugar-phosphate backbone.

No mRNA amounts to serious medical and corporate fraud!

Hitachi SEM & Bruker EDX Imager

Using a Hitachi SEM & Bruker EDX Imager, in all samples tested, over 2 days, we found no evidence of mRNA.

Lipid content was confirmed by Raman spectroscopy. A few photos (above) from the trip to the lab.

Please Help Us Do The Live Streaming Science

We urgently need to be able to pay for more lab time (5 Days = $5000).

Please use this link to contribute – https://wtyl.glitch.me/

Links:
(SEM/EDX) https://youtu.be/WOWMjQedgc8?t=4674
(Raman) https://youtu.be/x3PpfCWC2Ps?t=716

The post Where is the Phosphorous? appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

Principles

The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century, with notable practitioners in previous centuries. It involves careful observation and applying rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions can distort how one interprets the observation.

It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such observations; experimental and measurement-based statistical testing of deductions drawn from the hypotheses, and refinement (or elimination) of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings.

These are principles of the scientific method, as distinguished from a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.

Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, the underlying process is frequently the same from one field to another.

The process in the scientific method involves making conjectures (hypothetical explanations), deriving predictions from the hypotheses as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments or empirical observations based on those predictions.

Hypothesis

A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while seeking answers to a question. The hypothesis might be very specific, or it might be broad.

Scientists then test hypotheses by conducting experiments or studies.

A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, implying that it is possible to identify a possible outcome of an experiment or observation that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis; otherwise, the hypothesis cannot be meaningfully tested.

Experiment

The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations agree with or conflict with the expectations deduced from a hypothesis. Experiments can take place anywhere from a garage to a remote mountaintop to CERN’s Large Hadron Collider.

Though the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, it represents rather a set of general principles.

The Steps

Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry (nor to the same degree), and they are not always in the same order.

The scientific method is prevalent in all fields of science. Here are the usual steps to solving a problem using the scientific method:

• Observe some aspect of the universe.
• Ask a question about why this thing is happening.
• Develop a testable explanation (hypothesis) based on the theory.
• Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
• Experiment and observe to test the prediction.
• Use the results of the experiment to create new hypotheses or predictions.

If a theory holds up to repeated testing, scientists gain confidence in it, and a hypothesis that’s supported consistently over time eventually comes to be considered a law, fact, or principle.

Information courtesy of From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Please visit – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

The post The Scientific Method appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.

Provides Structural Fingerprints

Raman spectroscopy is commonly used in chemistry to provide a structural fingerprint by which molecules can be identified. Most people will never have to completely know or understand how this all works. The article will just cover very basic information.

Raman spectroscopy is a spectroscopic technique typically used to determine vibrational modes of molecules, although rotational and other low-frequency modes of systems may also be observed.

It relies upon inelastic scattering of photons, known as Raman scattering. A source of monochromatic light, usually from a laser in the visible, near-infrared, or near ultraviolet range is used, although X-rays can also be used.

Lasers and Photons

The laser light interacts with molecular vibrations, phonons, or other excitations in the system, resulting in the energy of the laser photons being shifted up or down.

The shift in energy gives information about the vibrational modes in the system. Infrared spectroscopy typically yields similar yet complementary information.

Typically, a sample is illuminated with a laser beam. Electromagnetic radiation from the illuminated spot is collected with a lens and sent through a monochromator.

Elastic scattered radiation at the wavelength corresponding to the laser line (Rayleigh scattering) is filtered out by either a notch filter, edge pass filter, or a band pass filter, while the rest of the collected light is dispersed onto a detector.

Collecting Raman Spectra

Spontaneous Raman scattering is typically very weak; as a result, for many years the main difficulty in collecting Raman spectra was separating the weak inelastically scattered light from the intense Rayleigh scattered laser light (referred to as “laser rejection”).

Historically, Raman spectrometers used holographic gratings and multiple dispersion stages to achieve a high degree of laser rejection. In the past, photomultipliers were the detectors of choice for dispersive Raman setups, which resulted in long acquisition times.

However, modern instrumentation almost universally employs notch or edge filters for laser rejection. Dispersive single-stage spectrographs (axial transmissive (AT) or Czerny–Turner (CT) monochromators) paired with CCD detectors are most common although Fourier transform (FT) spectrometers are also common for use with NIR lasers.

Laser Wavelengths

The name “Raman spectroscopy” typically refers to vibrational Raman using laser wavelengths that are not absorbed by the sample.

There are many other variations of Raman spectroscopy including surface-enhanced Raman, resonance Raman, tip-enhanced Raman, polarized Raman, stimulated Raman, transmission Raman, spatially offset Raman, and hyper Raman.

The post Raman Spectroscopy appeared first on Synaptek-DLS.