IMA at CHEST 2025: A Milestone in Independent Medical Research
At CHEST 2025, IMA presented more original research than many major institutions. With over 1,600 peer-reviewed publications between Drs. Varon and Marik, independent science is gaining ground.
CHEST has long been a stronghold of institutional medicine: an annual gathering where pulmonary and critical care physicians from the world’s largest hospital systems and academic centers set the tone for clinical standards and scientific recognition.
At CHEST 2025, something different happened: an independent alliance is outpacing the establishment.
Led by IMA President Dr. Joseph Varon, our team contributed more original research than many of the most well-funded organizations in the country. That isn’t a boast; it’s a measurable step forward in reclaiming scientific spaces that were once closed to independent researchers.
“At CHEST 2025, I was struck by the fact that the IMA—our independent, grassroots organization—had more scientific presentations than some of the largest medical institutions in the country. Proof that dedication and vision often outperform size and bureaucracy.” — Dr. Joseph Varon
What is CHEST and Why Does It Matter
Founded in 1935, the CHEST Annual Meeting is organized by the American College of Chest Physicians. It is one of the most influential global conferences in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Each year, thousands of clinicians, researchers, and policymakers gather to share emerging science, update protocols, and shape future guidelines.
Participation at CHEST is a strong signal of credibility. It’s the place where clinical science is discussed not just in theory, but in terms of its immediate application to patient care. For an independent medical group to be not only present but prominent shows that change in medicine is possible—and already underway.
Independent, Evidence-Driven, and Growing
For decades, CHEST has been the domain of large academic institutions and government-aligned research groups. This year, Dr. Varon, together with several of his researchers and students, presented a dozen original abstracts, including work on:
Pulmonary disease
Intensive care medicine
Optimization of patient care
That kind of presence doesn’t happen by accident. It’s the result of years of persistence, especially at a time when independent research was under immense pressure.
If you followed us during the COVID era, you’ll know that our physicians challenged flawed policies and raised concerns about mRNA vaccine harms. The response was swift: licenses were threatened, voices were censored, and reputations attacked. But the work continued.
The fact that we’re here today—publishing, presenting, and helping shape clinical conversations—is a testament to the strength of our mission. We survived a Goliath-like effort to silence us, and we’re still standing. Still researching. Still delivering solutions for patients.
Proof in the Medical Literature
Beyond CHEST, IMA researchers continue to publish in respected peer-reviewed journals. Recent examples include:
These studies are recent examples of a much broader trend: our science, once dismissed, is now being examined seriously. The same mainstream institutions that ignored our findings are beginning to revisit the data and ask questions we have been asking for years.
IMA’s growing influence in medical research reflects leadership grounded in clinical experience, scientific rigor, and long-term commitment.
Dr. Joseph Varon, Co-Founder and Chief Medical Officer of IMA, has authored more than 1,000 peer-reviewed studies while continuing to practice medicine and mentor the next generation of researchers. He also leads the editorial vision of the Journal of Independent Medicine as its Editor-in-Chief, ensuring a continued focus on practical, patient-centered science.
Dr. Paul Marik, Co-Founder and Chief Scientific Officer, has published over 600 peer-reviewed papers and remains one of the most cited intensivists in the world. His recent induction into the Orthomolecular Medicine Hall of Fame recognized both the scope and influence of his scientific contributions.
Together, they’ve helped establish a model for medical research that puts patients first, values real-world outcomes, and refuses to compromise on scientific integrity.
A Journal for Uncensored Science
The Journal of Independent Medicine is preparing to release its fourth edition this November, marking the completion of its inaugural year.
The journal exists for one purpose: to give space to research that asks difficult but essential questions. Many of those questions cannot be raised in pharmaceutical-sponsored publications. Here, they can. It is a platform for physicians and scientists who still believe that medicine must serve patients first and tell the truth, even when it is inconvenient.
Expanding in 2026: Special Editions
Building on the success of its first year, IMA will introduce two new special editions in 2026:
“Treating Post-Vaccine Complications”
Submission Deadline: December 31, 2025
Publication Date: 2026
“Repurposed Drugs and Nutraceuticals in the Chronic Disease Epidemic”
Submission Deadline: February 28, 2026
Publication Date: 2026
These editions will expand opportunities for independent researchers and clinicians to publish meaningful work that drives progress rather than compliance.
CHEST 2025 was not about arrival or recognition. It was about progress earned through steady, verifiable work.
Through peer-reviewed research, transparent publishing, and the leadership of dedicated physicians, IMA is proving that independent medicine can thrive within the highest levels of scientific discourse.
Our work has always stood on its own merit. What has changed is that the world is finally ready to recognize it. And this is only the beginning.
For more coverage, check out where our globetrotting team of experts has been lately below:
Study Links Surge in Children’s Memory Problems to Wireless Radiation Exposure
Children and teens in Sweden and Norway are experiencing an “alarming” rise in memory problems, according to the authors of a new peer-reviewed study that linked the issue to increased exposure to wireless radiation. “Radiation exposure must be reduced, and people must be informed about the associated health risks,” one of the study’s authors said.
October 23, 2025This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website.
Children and teens in Sweden and Norway are experiencing an “alarming” rise in memory problems, which the authors of a new peer-reviewed study attributed to increased exposure to wireless radiation.
“The steep increase in memory issues cannot be explained by changes in diagnostic criteria or reporting to the registries alone,” Lennart Hardell, M.D., Ph.D., one of the study’s authors, said in a press release. He added:
“We urge our findings on increasing numbers of children having impaired memory to be taken seriously by public health authorities and consider children’s increasing exposure to wireless radiation as a possible cause.
“Thus, we ask for measures aimed at decreasing exposure to RF radiation [radiofrequency radiation] to protect the brain and general health of children.”
Hardell and lead study author Mona Nilsson, co-founder and director of the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation, examined national health data in Sweden and Norway and found that the number of medical consultations for memory disturbances in Norwegian children ages 5-19 increased roughly 8.5-fold from 2006 to 2024.
In Sweden, the number of children ages 5-19 diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment — a diagnosis that includes memory problems — increased nearly 60-fold from 2010 to 2024.
“The findings must be taken seriously and evaluated,” Hardell told The Defender. “Action must be taken to reduce children’s overall exposure — especially in schools.”
Nilsson agreed. “These alarming trends must be reversed — radiation exposure must be reduced, and people must be informed about the associated health risks,” she said.
Authors link memory problems to wireless radiation
The authors argued in their report that wireless radiation is a leading cause of memory decline in children.
“There is abundant evidence [dating back] several decades, both on animals and humans, that RF radiation impairs memory,” Nilsson said. “The trends we are observing coincide closely in time with the sharply increasing exposure of children and adolescents to RF radiation.”
Wireless exposure has escalated in the last decade due to the increasing use of cellphones, wireless headsets, Wi-Fi and 5G, Hardell said.
“Other contributing factors can, of course, not be excluded,” he said. “They must, however, be defined and not based on hypothetical discussion.”
New investigation targets ‘biased’ European report on RF radiation
The European Ombudsman, who “investigates complaints about maladministration by EU [European Union] institutions and bodies,” will question the European Commission on how it chose the experts to write the report, said Sophie Pelletier, president of PRIARTEM/Electrosensibles de France, in an Oct. 22 press release.
The report, called the SCHEER Opinion, was adopted in April 2023 by the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER).
The SCHEER Opinion was “clearly biased,” according to an October 2023 critique published by the Council for Safe Telecommunications in Denmark and the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation.
The investigation stems from a complaint filed by several European nonprofits, including the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation, alleging that the authors of the SCHEER Opinion had conflicts of interest due to industry ties or industry-funded research.
The nonprofits also claimed that the European Commission excluded experts critical of wireless radiation’s possible health effects from the report’s working group and that the report authors ignored peer-reviewed studiesshowing harmful effects from exposure below current limits.
In the U.S., the Federal Communications Commission(FCC) has not updated its RF radiation exposure limits since 1996 and bases them largely on a few small sample studies conducted in the 1970s and 1980s.
The FCC has not yet complied with a 2021 court-ordered mandateto explain how it determined that its current guidelines adequately protect humans and the environment from the harmful effects of RF radiation exposure.
A groundbreaking new analysis has uncovered evidence that Pfizer’s Covid mRNA shots may have contained bacterial DNA fragments with dangerous immune-activating signatures.
The discovery is raising urgent questions about how regulators ever allowed the injections to reach the public.
The findings were revealed in a preprint published by molecular biologist Kevin McKernan.
McKernan used advanced Oxford Nanopore sequencing technology to analyze a Pfizer vaccine lot (FL8095).
His results revealed:
Bacterial-style DNA methylation marks (m6A), a fingerprint of contamination from E. coli–derived DNA.
Evidence of incomplete linearization, meaning the DNA used to manufacture the shots may not have been fully processed, leaving behind problematic fragments.
Signals that the contamination could, in theory, trigger powerful immune responses, potentially leading to harmful side effects.
These findings raise serious questions about the integrity of the health regulatory process during the declared COVID-19 pandemic. (See link for article)
_______________
**Comment**
Science show such fragments can set off inflammation and cytokine storms.
Hatfill emphasized that he did not believe Kennedy himself had ordered the firing, instead pointing to a small inner circle he described as acting independently of the Secretary’s agenda. He said they have blocked multiple pandemic preparedness and vaccine reform initiatives.
In the interview, both Hatfill and Gray Delany, former Director of MAHA Implementation state their firings coincided with efforts to expose the catastrophic harms of mRNA vaccine technology and the ongoing concealment of safety data within U.S. health agencies. Source
Dr. Steven Hatfill — one of the few men of integrity within HHS — has been fired in what he describes as “a coup to overthrow Mr. Kennedy,” led by Chief of Staff Matt Buckham.
Dr. Hatfill, a highly respected biosecurity expert whose guidance helped inform Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s decision to terminate $500 million in mRNA research contracts, was likely targeted for standing up for the American people against the dangerous transnational Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex.
According to The New York Times, Hatfill refused to resign when pressured by Buckham, who allegedly told him the department “wanted to go in a different direction.” Instead, Hatfill demanded that HHS fire him outright.
The Department justified the firing by claiming Hatfill “misrepresented himself” as Chief Medical Officer — a claim Hatfill refuted by producing official HHS business cards carrying that exact title.
Dr. Hatfill has been one of the few federal insiders openly confronting the immense dangers of mRNA technology and actually trying to Make America Healthy Again. (See link for article)
_______________
**Comment**
Dr. Hatfill is counting the cost for standing for what is right.
I’m happy to report that everything posted on this website on the dystopian COVID chapter aligns with what Dr. Hatfill says in this interview. I am indebted to doctors and researchers who shared prolifically on Linkedin early on. Many of these experts are retired or not employed by the government and could speak freely. Unfortunately, one by one, Linked in kicked these truth-tellers off the platform until one day I too was ‘disappeared.’
This frightening injection for cows and scary additives for their food is to curb the methane they produce. All for profit of course – Gates’ profit. Just when we hoped Gates would disappear from our sight, he’s back with more schemes for our food. He just had a secret meeting with President Trump and then came back two weeks later for another. Something monstrous is definitely brewing in the kitchen.
Gates has his fingers in so many pies it’s hard to keep them all straight. The many pies include, but aren’t limited to:
Florida Governor Slams Proposal to Engineer Meat Allergies in Humans to ‘Save the Planet’
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis criticized a bioethicist’s video suggesting humans could be engineered to develop a red meat allergy, linking the idea to the World Economic Forum and World Health Organization. “Genetically engineering humans to become allergic to meat because some elites think people eat ‘too much’ of it is insane,” DeSantis wrote.
October 20, 2025This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis last week publicly rejected the notion that humans could be engineered to develop a red meat allergy as a way to curb meat consumption and protect the environment — an idea he linked to the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the World Health Organization (WHO).
On X, DeSantis posted a 2016 video of Matthew Liao, a professor of bioethics at New York University and director of its Center for Bioethics. Liao tells his audience that ticks could be used to spread allergies that make humans unable to tolerate red meat — an idea that has been repeated by other bioethicists.
“People eat too much meat. And if they were to cut down on their consumption of meat, then it would actually really help the planet,” Liao said in the video. “There’s this thing called the lone star tick, where if it bites you, you will become allergic to meat. So, that’s something we can do through human engineering.”
DeSantis said Liao’s statements are “an example of why entities like the WEF and WHO are persona non grata” in Florida.
“Genetically engineering humans to become allergic to meat because some elites think people eat ‘too much’ of it is insane,” DeSantis wrote.
Tim Hinchliffe, editor of The Sociable, said that while Liao’s comments were not new — the video is from an almost 10-year-old talk at the World Science Festival — DeSantis’ remarks were significant.
“Although he’s slow to the game, at least he’s noticing,” Hinchliffe said.
Liao “has been talking about making people allergic to meat for over a decade, going back to his TED Talk 12 years ago, in 2013,” Hinchliffe said.
During that talk, Liao said, “Just as some people are naturally intolerant to milk or crayfish, like myself, we could artificially induce mild intolerance to meat by stimulating our immune system against common bovine proteins.”
“This isn’t dietary advice — it’s social engineering,” Ji said. “Unelected global organizations have no business dictating what free people eat, especially when they’re demonizing traditional foods that have sustained human health for millennia.”
Kendall Mackintosh, a board-certified nutrition specialist, said such claims aren’t “just about climate,” but are also centered around “control and consolidation.”
“Real, regenerative farmingsupports independence and local economies. Centralizing food systems through synthetic or lab-grown products benefits corporations, not families,” Mackintosh said.
Ji agreed. He said such proposals are indicative of “the merger of biotechnology and behavioral control.” He added:
“The war on meat has never been about climate. It’s about control — consolidating food production under centralized, patented, technology-dependent systems.
“Meat represents everything the global technocracy fears: decentralized production, nutritional independence and cultural traditions that resist standardization. When people can raise their own food, they’re harder to control. The WEF understands this perfectly.”
Recent paper suggests spreading meat allergy to humans is a moral obligation
A paper published earlier this month in the journal Bioethics proposed using the lone star tick to spread alpha-gal syndrome (AGS), “a condition whose only effect is the creation of a severe but nonfatal red meat allergy.”
In the paper, Western Michigan University bioethics professors Parker Crutchfield, Ph.D., and Blake Hereth, Ph.D., argued that “if eating meat is morally impermissible, then efforts to prevent the spread of tickborne AGS are also morally impermissible.”
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), when it bites, the lone star tick transmits the alpha-gal sugar molecule into the human bloodstream, leading to a red meat allergy. Consuming red meat after being infected could result in life-threatening anaphylaxis.
The paper’s authors present what they called the “Convergence Argument.” If a specific action “prevents the world from becoming a significantly worse place, doesn’t violate anyone’s rights, and promotes virtuous action or character,” then it becomes a moral obligation to perform this action, they said.
According to the authors, the use of AGS to spread a red meat allergy to humans meets these criteria. However, they acknowledged ethical obstacles: few people would likely volunteer for the tick bite, and forcing it on people would raise questions of bodily autonomy and freedom.
The authors told The College Fix in an August email that their paper does not constitute an endorsement of spreading AGS to humans, but offers a hypothetical framework raising ethical and philosophical questions.
Mackintosh questioned this denial. “Calling it a ‘thought experiment’ doesn’t make it any less disturbing. The idea that inducing an allergy or harming human health could somehow serve a moral purpose shows just how far detached some parts of academia have become from basic human ethics,” she said.
“The fact that this was even published tells you how normalized these anti-human, anti-food narratives are becoming under the guise of ‘ethics,’” Mackintosh added.
Ji said the paper raises questions about bodily autonomy.
“This is about far more than food, it’s about whether human beings retain sovereignty over their own bodies, or whether that sovereignty can be overridden by those who believe they know better. The answer to that question will determine whether we remain free,” he said.
Mackintosh questioned the authors’ claim that lone star tick bites “only” lead to AGS.
AGS “can cause severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, and can completely alter someone’s diet and quality of life,” Mackintosh said. “The suggestion of using ticks or any biological vector to intentionally spread an allergy is beyond unethical. It’s dangerous, unpredictable and medically reckless.”
A 2023 CDC report said AGS cases were on the rise in the U.S.
DeSantis previously outlawed sale of lab-grown meat in Florida
While DeSantis didn’t directly address the paper or AGS in his X posts, he has consistently spoken out against efforts to shift people away from red meat and toward alternatives such as lab-grown meat and insects.
Last year, DeSantis signed legislation prohibiting the sale of lab-grown meat in Florida. According to a press release, the law aims “to stop the World Economic Forum’s goal of forcing the world to eat lab-grown meat and insects,” which a 2021 WEF article characterized as an “overlooked” source of protein.”
“Florida is fighting back against the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals,” DeSantis said at the time.
Joseph Sansone, Ph.D., a psychotherapist who sued DeSantis and Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody to prohibit mRNA vaccines in Florida, said that while he has been “litigating against DeSantis for over a year and a half to stop mRNA injections,” he agrees with DeSantis on this issue.
“DeSantis is calling out something that many Americans feel — they don’t want global organizations or unelected bodies deciding what they can or can’t eat,” Sansone said.
Mackintosh said lab-grown meat raises questions about potential health risks.
“There are questions about contamination risks, the use of antibiotics or growth media, nutrient content, and even the true environmental impact once scaled up. It’s also ultra-processed — far from the whole, nutrient-dense foods our bodies were designed to thrive on,” she said.
“Many lab-grown meat companies are using immortalized cell lines — cells that are capable of continuously dividing and growing in a manner disturbingly similar to cancer cells,” Ji said. There is a “complete absence of long-term safety studies” for such products.
Scientists have raised similar concerns about human consumption of insects. The exoskeletons of many insects contain chitin, a natural material that can trigger an allergic reaction in humans. Some studies suggest that humans cannot digest chitin, while other studies suggest humans “don’t digest it well.”
WEF suggests consuming alternative meats will ‘save the planet’
In a 2019 video, the WEF suggested that in the not-too-distant future, humans would be allowed to consume only “one beef burger, two portions of fish and one or two eggs per week” to “save the planet.”
That year, the WEF published a white paper calling for “a transformation in the global system for protein provision” to meet climate-related targets.
Mackintosh said corporate interests are behind the push for “alternative” meats.
“The biggest winners in the lab-grown meat push are large food conglomerates, biotech companies and venture capital investors who own the patents and production technology. Small farmers and ranchers — the backbone of our food system — lose. This is about creating dependence, not sustainability,” she said.
Ji agreed. “Follow the money. Biotech corporations and their investors stand to profit massively from patents and market control,” he said.
Liao suggested chemically inducing empathy, making kids smaller
DeSantis and others have suggested a link between Liao and the WEF, including a claim that Liao’s 2012 co-authored paper, “Human Engineering and Climate Change,” which argued that “human engineering deserves further consideration in the debate about climate change,” was the subject of a discussion at the WEF’s 2021 annual meeting.
Hinchliffe noted that the WEF “does have a habit of scrubbing what it considers to be negative publicity from its website.” However, whether or not there is a direct connection between Liao and the WEF, Liao “is definitely aligned” with WEF policies, he said.
“Academic papers proposing disease vectors to manipulate behavior aren’t harmless philosophy — they’re rehearsals. They move the Overton window, normalize the abnormal and provide intellectual scaffolding for future atrocities. The field of bioethics has become less about protecting human dignity and more about rationalizing its violation.”
Madison Area Lyme Support Group 