Cornering a Snake Venom Salesman
Additional remarks on Dr. Ardis' doubling down and reactions to his snake venom theory.
This is a follow-up to my first Ardis post from Friday.
Over the course of last week many people have provided their own response to Dr. Ardis’ COVID/snake venom theory. I came late to the party and posted my response on Friday, but at that time Dr. Ardis was part of two additional interviews on Stew Peter’s Rumble account.
You would think that such a wild claim as snake venom in the water would be heavily substantiated but that apparently does not appear to be the case. Actually, it appears that Dr. Ardis has doubled down on his idea.
I don’t want to belabor the point- plenty of people have done so already. But sometimes it’s good to analyze how people approach reactions to their arguments or ideas. So just as important it is to debunk Dr. Ardis’ claims it’s also good to critique the fallout of the “Watch the Water” documentary.
So I’ll add some additional points which are worth looking into in order to critique Dr. Ardis even further. Note that these will not be in no order and many not fit the videos below.
And for those who would like to follow along I am referring to these two videos specifically from Stew Peter’s Rumble account:
Second Stew Peters Interview:
Interview with Dr. Jane Ruby:
Ardis still doesn’t understand Monoclonal Antibodies
I previously mentioned that Dr. Ardis did not understand much about Monoclonal Antibodies. He also didn’t appear to read the Ebola study in much detail as he clearly overlooked that Monoclonals were the other treatments used in the trial.
In the second interview with Dr. Jane Ruby Dr. Ardis explains why he initially badmouthed monoclonal antibodies; he was given studies detailing that Monoclonal Antibodies were derived from the cancer cells of pig spleens and that adding carcinogenic tissues to patients would cause horrible issues down the line.
Sounds very scary right? Well, too bad for Dr. Ardis but that is how Monoclonal Antibodies are produced.
Monoclonals must be derived from cells that produce antibodies- the B cells. However, B cells won’t give up enough many antibodies to mass produce and distribute. Therefore, if one were to ramp up B cell proliferation one can accelerate antibody production.
How would one do such a thing? By utilizing cancer cells! Cancer cells are utilized to rapidly divide and produce the large number of necessary antibodies that can be harvested and isolated for therapeutic use.
This process combines B cells coding for the intended antibody with a cancer cell leading to the formation of what’s called a hybridoma (a hybrid cancer/B cell) and is outlined below:
As indicated above a natural source, such as an animal, is used to source the initial B cells. These animals are usually challenged with the antigen in question (like SARS-COV2’s spike protein or against snake venom peptides) and then the various desired B cells are isolated from the spleen. These cells are called splenocytes. Afterwards, the best chosen one then needs to be mass produced. That’s where the hybridization with cancer cells to form hybridomas comes into play.
There’s a variety of animals that are sourced for their B cells including mice, rabbits, and guinea pigs. Yes, the “pigs” that Ardis alludes to are likely to be guinea pigs, and in fact guinea pigs appear to be one of the best animals for the hybridoma process.
I mean, just look at the little guys. Of course the would be perfect for producing antibodies:
This point is important to make. Dr. Ardis’ argument relies on the fact that Monoclonals play a key role as an anti-venom agent, yet time and time again he has shown that he knows nothing about Monoclonals (among other things) but still continues to pontificate as if he does. Even this point alone should be enough to dismantle his argument but we’ll go over a few other issues as well.
Here’s a few more points on immunity that Ardis does not substantiate:
In Stew’s second interview Ardis also claims that wild animals have protection against snake venom with enzymes, or something. He doesn’t actually know- he’s not a veterinarian or a snake venom expert.
But in the interview with Dr. Jane Rudy she asks if low doses of snake venom wouldn’t just produce immunity anyways (around 17:20 mark), to which Ardis…does not provide a response aside from not panicking about the water. Ok, don’t panic about the water, but what about the immunity gained from low dose venom exposure? At this point it feels like I’m spending more time researching to try and rebut Ardis more than he is at providing any actual viable evidence.
It’s all “snake venom peptides”!
What do you call it when you take a few segments from Chinese krait, add a dash of Chinese king cobra, and a few phosphodiesterases from vipers? An incoherent mess of a theory.
Dr. Ardis appears to have any answer to a critique or rebuttal, regardless of its relevancy. He has a habit of speaking in ambiguities when referring to “snake venom peptides”, and then choosing specific peptides when it suits his argument. On one hand these “snake venom peptides” are responsible for shedding our tissues and cells and in another vein they are responsible for incorporating the vaccine’s mRNA into our DNA.
This creates a problem for the sole fact that the toxic effects of snake venom are derived specifically from the snake venom peptide being examined. I’ll reiterate the point again that snake venom is comprised of many compounds including some enzymes such as phosphodiesterases or other proteins that may be involved with host receptor binding. The combination of proteins would also be unique to different venomous snakes.
The issue here is that Ardis is apparently picking any peptide that he wants that will fit his narrative. Take a few peptides here and add a few peptides there until I can fully validate my theory. It’s all peptides all the way down!
This type of approach is looking for the evidence to fit a conclusion rather than proposing a conclusion based on the evidence. Some scientists are guilty of committing such a crime; do a little p-hacking, pick up and drop a few participants, analyze your data using other statistical measures and voila! You apparently found a positive result rather than presenting a null result based on the evidence collected. This is likely how Aducanumab (another Monoclonal, or is it anit-venom?!) was found to improve cognitive function after Phase III trials ended due to lack of efficacy.
This begs the following questions:
How do the phosphodiesterases fit into the spike protein? And in fact, if snake venom is the true cause then there really should not be a spike protein to argue over, right? So why does it even matter that fragments of both krait and king cobra snakes are part of a spike protein which apparently should not exist because it is actually the snake venom peptides themselves that are responsible for the toxicities?
The phosphodiesterases are actually ironic, as Ardis claims they may be used to incorporate the vaccines into our cells (so were they there already?). It’s made ironic for the mere fact that phosphodiesterases break down nucleic acids- usually by metabolizing trinucleotides into their monophosphate form or by breaking down DNA or RNA. Not a very effective method when you want to incorporate genetic material rather than break it down.
But what about the toxin study from Italy indicating dozens of toxin-like proteins in those infected with SARS-COV2?
The study Ardis is referring to is this study3 in which the blood, urine, and stool samples of COVID positive patients were collected and measured for toxin-like proteins using mass spectrometry. The results were compared to samples from a control group supposedly free of cancer and autoimmune disease- this is important to note.
So the results here do indicate elevated levels of toxin-like peptides. However, I have many reservations with this study. I was wondering if there may have been translational issues, although that’s a rather unhelpful assumption to make. Instead, it appears that these researchers may be alluding to COVID as the cause of these peptides when it is more likely that the presence of these peptides are the result of cell damage and the release of these proteins into the bloodstream.
It’s the same issue that Ardis ran into when citing the University of Arizona study regarding secreted phospholipase A2 group IIA, or sPLA2-IIA being found in COVID positive patients. This enzyme is similar to those seen in rattlesnake venom, but that is a completely irrelevant point. It appears that news outlets have used this as a talking point to promote fear. But just like the other toxins from the Italy study the presence of these enzymes are likely indicative of severe damage from COVID, not from COVID itself. A comment is made in the press release that alludes to this fact (emphasis mine):
The sPLA2-IIA enzyme, which has similarities to an active enzyme in rattlesnake venom, is found in low concentrations in healthy individuals and has long been known to play a critical role in defense against bacterial infections, destroying microbial cell membranes.
It’s also quite ridiculous that Ardis brings up the associations with cone snail venom4, almost as if it’s another point that he will incorporate into his hoarder-like collection of venom peptides.
Sounds crazy? Well, at the end of the Dr. Ruby video (~22 min mark) he suggests that one of the drugs in PAXLOVID5 can cause coagulation just like… snake venom toxins! I cannot even make this stuff up at this point!
Dr. Ardis is reaching a point where he is incorporating anything under the sun that- to him- may be conflated with snake venom peptides. Everything that appears to have the same effects as snake venom peptides are now snake venom peptides. Full stop. It’s quite amazing the amount of gymnastics required tie together all of Ardis’ theories!
A few (more) remarks:
Just in case you all aren’t tired of more ranting, here’s a few more points worth pointing out:
Ruby asks Ardis if the chemical structure of Remdesivir is similar to snake venom peptides6, to which Ardis remarks that he’s not a chemist so looking at the molecules is not his thing. A weird point, considering that his website sells supplements. You would think someone who sells supplements may be involved in R&D and thus should know how to look at chemical structures. It’s also made weird as this serves as a common qualifier to Dr. Ardis when questioned on things he should know…
Sublethal is not unharmful. The new talking point for Dr. Ardis when confronted about his water idea is to pivot and proclaim that the doses given are clearly not effective; they are sublethal which explains the low levels of death associated with COVID. This doesn’t make sense, mostly because sublethal is not the same as something not being harmful. This doesn’t explain difference in individual symptom onset. It also doesn’t explain why people would not produce antibodies towards the peptides when provided such low doses. When asked about the PCR testing of deer or if people would gain immunity Ardis pivots to this newfound “sublethal” talking point which actually doesn’t even answer the question.
Children aren’t getting sick because of Melatonin. You would think children would be more susceptible to snake venom peptides, and Dr. Ardis is confronted with this point as well. However, he has an answer: children produce high levels of Melatonin which, of course, acts as an anti-venom. Again, the evidence fits the model here. Dr. Ardis is also showing his inability to understand what he is reading, as Melatonin does not bind directly to snake venom peptides but is beneficial due to its antioxidant properties. Therefore, it can’t stop the cytotoxicity but reduces some of the oxidative stress and inflammation that may be caused by the peptides. There is this study7 which supports Melatonin’s use in conjunction with anti-venom, and if this is the study Ardis references he may have misinterpreted the title. Again, this just appears to be another example of Ardis finding the evidence to corroborate his conclusion. Also, if you saw the Stew Peters interview with an animation labeled “MT1” and was wondering what that was; that was a melatonin receptor- the flashing lights should have indicated those were synapses, but I guess Stew’s editors may have wanted people to mistake them for snake venom peptides…
Peptides, peptides, peptides… For anyone who has been on this Substack for quite some time you may have noticed that there are some points where I use the same word over and over again without using any other synonyms. A lot of what I write about is me entering into new territories, which means that I will be writing about a lot of things that I don’t have a deep knowledge of and would rather feign ignorance by using the same word many times in a post. All this to say that Ardis keeps using peptides instead of referring to them as proteins, which makes me believe that Ardis is using the same coping mechanism as me- he’s not quite sure what “peptides” are. Am I sure about this and not just projecting? Not quite, but in another interview on Red Pill News (more on this podcast later) he was questioned as to why he refers to his theory using the word “poisoning” rather than “envenoming” and suggested that not many people know what “envenomation “ is. But then how many people know that peptides are proteins?
Again, there’s plenty more to be said, but as painful as it may be I would suggest to others that they watch some of the more recent, shorter videos and make up their own mind rather than to listen to what I and other people say indiscriminately.
What to make of the mad doctor?
Now, it’s hard to make of what’s been going on with Dr. Ardis. I am in no professional position to make any claims about the mental health of some random chiropractor that I have never heard of before. However, the beginning of his interview on Red Pill News is quite telling. Take a look at the first few minutes and hear how he explains his situation and the fallout he has experienced. But more importantly, a few seconds after the six minute mark (~6:10) he is asked by the interviewer if he came up with his theory on his own or if he had help.
Ardis’ response? “I didn’t talk to anyone else; it was all me.”
And that response made me think of one concept: that Ardis may be experiencing delusions of grandeur8. Delusions are false beliefs one may hold while grandeur refers to a state of greatness. Taken together, delusions of grandeur suggest that someone has the false sense of an inflated, unearned sense of ego and greatness. They’ve essentially entered into a state in which they consider themselves to be of far greater importance than what others may consider these individuals to be.
You can see that in Ardis’ language; how he pieced the snake venom peptide pieces together, how he came up with his theory on his own, how he was sent by God through divine intervention to save millions of lives.
It should be noted that delusions of grandeur may appear with delusions of persecution, in which people may have a belief that they are being targeted. Remember that Dr. Ardis has mentioned his life is in danger, that the FBI or CIA may be targeting him, and even mentioned in the Dr. Ruby interview that he’s likely to be on Pfizer’s hitlist when he mentions PAXLOVID’s toxicity.
It doesn’t help that the likes of Stew Peters are feeding into these delusions. The fanaticism that has emerged around Ardis only help to bolster more of his ideas and delusions irrespective of whether they are substantiated.
Just yesterday Stew Peters and Dr. Ruby commented on a “finding” validating Ardis’ snake venom theory, and have even said to watch out for members of the FLCCC who are now criticizing Dr. Ardis. Unfortunately, Dr. Pierre Kory seems to have met their bad side with his recent article providing his take on the mad doctor’s theory.
We’re now entering into a new territory, and one that I’ve begun to become more concerned about. As I stated in my first post about Dr. Ardis it appears that a few COVID dissenters are pushing wild, unsubstantiated theories in an attempt to gain notoriety and a following. Although Dr. Ardis may be the largest perpetrator of such crimes I am seeing more of this approach emerging among others in this dissenter’s sphere.
So I encourage you all to watch these videos, do your own research, and keep the ideas laid out in my first Ardis post in mind, and don’t fall for the same types of fanaticism that we criticize our opponents for.
Frangieh, J., Rima, M., Fajloun, Z., Henrion, D., Sabatier, J. M., Legros, C., & Mattei, C. (2021). Snake Venom Components: Tools and Cures to Target Cardiovascular Diseases. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 26(8), 2223. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26082223
Koh, D. C. I., Armugam, A., & Jeyaseelan, K. (2006). Snake venom components and their applications in biomedicine. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 63(24), 3030–3041. doi:10.1007/s00018-006-6315-0
Brogna, C., Cristoni, S., Petrillo, M., Querci, M., Piazza, O., & Van den Eede, G. (2021). Toxin-like peptides in plasma, urine and faecal samples from COVID-19 patients. F1000Research, 10, 550. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.54306.2
Considering that cone snail venom is considered to be very lethal, this actually contradicts Ardis’ sublethal claims- you would probably assume that a more lethal toxin should increase the case fatality rate, but I’m sure Ardis will find a way to rationalize it. Remember, his initial theory was based on snake venom peptides, and thus the addition of a more lethal toxin would discredit his “sublethal” argument.
The drug in question is, of course, the highly contested Ritonavir which is a Cytochrome P450 enzyme inhibitor. There is some credence that it may contribute to blood coagulation, however Ritonavir has been in use for decades so unless Dr. Ardis can explain how a decades old drug is actually snake venom his argument is made moot again. For more on Ritonavir and coagulation there’s this article:
Kort, J. J., Aslanyan, S., Scherer, J., Sabo, J. P., Kohlbrenner, V., & Robinson, P. (2011). Effects of tipranavir, darunavir, and ritonavir on platelet function, coagulation, and fibrinolysis in healthy volunteers. Current HIV research, 9(4), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.2174/157016211796320306
This is something that is easy to answer: Remdesivir is a nucleoside analogue and looks like a nucleoside/nucleotide seen in our bodies. Peptides are proteins comprised of amino acids. This difference is big; Remdesivir looks similar to nucleoside building blocks while peptides are macromolecules made up of many amino acids. Size-wise there is no comparison between the two and they are both made up of different building blocks.
Sharma, R. D., Katkar, G. D., Sundaram, M. S., Swethakumar, B., Girish, K. S., & Kemparaju, K. (2017). Melatonin inhibits snake venom and antivenom induced oxidative stress and augments treatment efficacy. Acta tropica, 169, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actatropica.2017.01.004
Note that this is just a speculation and not a diagnosis or proper assessment so take this comment with some skepticism. Also, note that the phrase “delusions of grandeur” tends to be synonymized with the term megalomania.