Several U.S. tech companies announced big AI deals in the Middle East after the White House announced the kingdom's commitment to invest $600 billion in the U.S.

Among the largest deals, Nvidia will supply 18,000 of its cutting-edge Blackwell chips to Humain, an AI startup just launched by Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund.

Tuesday's announcement comes as part of the White House's Gulf tour, which includes President Trump and top CEOs.

"I am so delighted to be here to help celebrate the grand opening, the beginning of Humain," CEO Jensen Huang told the audience at the Saudi-U.S. Investment Forum in Riyadh on Tuesday, adding, "It is an incredible vision, indeed, that Saudi Arabia should build the AI infrastructure of your nation so that you could participate and help shape the future of this incredibly transformative technology."

A New Chapter of Global Technological Leadership — Born in Riyadh!

Today at the #SaudiUSForum2025, history was made.

Tareq Amin, CEO of HUMAIN and Jensen Huang, visionary CEO of NVIDIA, announced a groundbreaking partnership that is setting a new global benchmark: building AI… pic.twitter.com/Vm6ncjYCrA

Huang said that AI data centers are power-hungry, and the energy-rich country can use Nvidia's technology to unlock new capabilities. 

NEWS: NVIDIA and HUMAIN, an AI subsidiary of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, announced plans to build AI factories that will transform the country into a global AI leader.

NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang participated in a state visit today to share how this effort… pic.twitter.com/4Au6NxvTQ6

Humain plans to develop Arabic versions of large language models. CEO Tareq Amin said the startup would build 1.9 gigawatts of data centers by the decade's end. He anticipates Nvidia's technology will power AI factories across the Middle East. 

Here are the AI deals that were announced:

• Nvidia will supply hundreds of thousands of AI chips to Saudi Arabia, starting with 18,000 Blackwell GPUs for Humain, a newly launched AI firm backed by Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund.

• AMD announced a $10 billion collaboration with Humain to deploy 500 megawatts of AI infrastructure, including CPUs, GPUs, and orchestration software.

• Qualcomm signed an MoU with Humain to develop server CPUs for future data centers.

• Saudi firm DataVolt will invest $20 billion in U.S. AI data centers and energy infrastructure.

• Google, Oracle, Salesforce, AMD, Uber, and DataVolt will invest $80 billion into transformative technologies across both countries.

Trump's Gulf tour aims to ramp up trillions of investments between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. 

Outside of chips, the White House announced a $142 billion defense deal with the kingdom to provide "state-of-the-art warfighting equipment and services from over a dozen U.S. defense firms." This is nearly double Saudi Arabia's 2025 defense budget. 

Tuesday's announcement highlights how Nvidia's chips have become a bargaining tool for the Trump administration. 

Authored by Alex O'Donnell via CoinTelgraph.com,

Emerging technologies, including quantum computing, could potentially render the cryptography securing Bitcoin and other blockchain networks ineffective, asset manager BlackRock said in a regulatory filing. 

On May 9, BlackRock updated the registration statement for its iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT). The revised version addressed potential risks to the integrity of the Bitcoin network posed by quantum computing, the filing shows.

“[I]f quantum computing technology is able to advance […] it could potentially undermine the viability of many of the cryptographic algorithms used across the world’s information technology infrastructure, including the cryptographic algorithms used for digital assets like bitcoin,” BlackRock said.

It is the first time the asset manager has explicitly flagged this risk in its IBIT disclosures. The IBIT ETF is the largest spot Bitcoin ETF, with approximately $64 billion in net assets, according to its website.

Quantum computing is an emergent field that seeks to use the principles of quantum mechanics to greatly enhance computers’ processing capabilities. 

Source: James Seyffart/Bloomberg Intelligence

Record-breaking inflows

James Seyffart, an analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence, cautioned that risk disclosures such as IBIT’s are required to highlight every possible risk to an asset, even those that are extremely unlikely. 

“They are going to highlight any potential thing that can go wrong with any product they list or underlying asset that’s being invested in,” Seyffart said in a May 9 X post. “It's completely standard. And honestly [it] makes complete sense.”

Since launching in January, Bitcoin ETFs have collectively attracted more than $41 billion in net inflows, according to data from Farside Investors. 

Bitcoin ETF inflows reached all-time highs on May 8. Source: Eric Balchunas/Bloomberg Intelligence

On May 8, Bitcoin ETF net inflows surpassed all-time highs of around $40 billion, according to Bloomberg Intelligence. 

“Lifetime net flows is #1 most imp metric to watch IMO, very hard to grow, pure truth, no bs,” Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Eric Balchunas said in a May 9 X post. 

“Impressive, they were able to make it to a new high water mark so soon after the world was supposed to end.”

In February, Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino predicted that quantum computing would eventually enable hackers to break into inactive Bitcoin wallets and recover the dormant coins. 

“Any Bitcoin in lost wallets, including Satoshi (if not alive), will be hacked and put back in circulation,” Ardoino said in a Feb. 8 X post.

The cost of funding American universities is huge - covering everything from faculty salaries and special departments to laboratories.

Not only that, government funding for public institutions has fallen substantially over the past 50 years, making universities rely more heavily on tuition and other sources of revenue. The Trump administration’s freezing of billions in grants and contracts is adding further strain to elite academic institutions.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's  shows how American public universities are funded, based on data from the National Center for Education Statistics.

The Top Sources of Revenue for American Universities

Below, we break down the $392 billion in revenues generated across 1,592 public American institutions as of 2023:

State government funding, typically in the form of research grants, contracts, and appropriations, makes up the largest share at 28%.

Overall, New Hampshire ranks last in spending on higher public education spending per student, followed by Vermont. Going further, 25 states spend less than levels seen in 2008, with Nevada, Arizona, and Louisiana spending 30% less in 2023.

In absolute terms, California and Texas spend the most on academic funding, at $22.3 billion and $11.5 billion, respectively in fiscal 2025.

Meanwhile, tuition and fees generated 21% of revenues totaling $80.8 billion. Despite tuition costs more than tripling since 1990, it has struggled to make up the funding losses from state cutbacks. At the same time, university spending has swelled for administrators, construction, and faculty salaries as demand for higher education has increased.

Looking at private sources of revenue, these brought in $51.2 billion, or 13% of the total. Private sources include endowment additions, investment income, and private grants. While universities have massive endowment funds, funding is often tied to specific purposes. For instance, certain donors will designate funds to scholarships or a specific research center over a series of years.

To learn more about this topic from a global perspective, check out this graphic on the top universities outside of America.

Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Florida officials announced that 1,800 state Highway Patrol troopers are the first in the nation to receive federal credentials under an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agreement allowing them to arrest illegal immigrants on their own.

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent and a local police officer arrest an illegal immigrant in Florida in April 2025. ICE

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said at a press conference on May 12 that the state’s ongoing partnership with ICE included what is known as 287(g) agreements, where state and local law enforcement partner with ICE to help arrest and deport illegal immigrants.

The Florida Highway Patrol entered into a 287(g) task force model that gives them the power to arrest foreign nationals who are in the country illegally and place detainers on them during routine policing, such as traffic stops.

In essence, it allows local law enforcement to operate as an extension of ICE under federal supervision.

DeSantis encouraged other states to support President Donald Trump’s efforts to deport illegal immigrants, noting the success of Operation Tidal Wave. The recent joint federal-state operation arrested more than 1,100 illegal immigrants.

Some of those arrested included members of gangs such as MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, both designated as terrorist organizations by the Trump administration.

Additionally, DeSantis said Florida also swore in 100 troopers as special deputy U.S. marshals, which will allow them to execute federal search warrants and remove dangerous illegal immigrants.

Dave Kerner, director of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, said during the press conference that the Florida troopers are the first fully credentialed law enforcement to be fully operational under the 287(g) task force model.

“What that means is, if you see a state trooper, he or she has federal authorities to detain, investigate, apprehend, and deport,” Kerner said. “We have troopers in all 67 counties of this great state that have that authority.”

Kerner told The Epoch Times that troopers serving as U.S. marshals will be able to go into homes to serve warrants, which isn’t part of the 287(g) agreements.

He said that the programs offer flexibility to state and local jurisdictions, allowing them to determine their level of involvement once they sign up for the agreements.

“It is, by and large, a voluntary effort,” he said. “You can decide how much you want to participate.”

Illegal immigrants from Venezuela turn themselves in to Texas state troopers after crossing the border from Mexico into Del Rio, Texas, on May 18, 2021. John Moore/Getty Images

DeSantis added that there’s a plan on the table that, if approved by the federal government, would allow military judge advocates to act as immigration judges and provide makeshift detention space and transportation for illegal immigrants.

The governor noted that the state’s experience with disaster response, such as during hurricanes, helped the state come up with the plan. He said there are 70,000 to 80,000 illegal immigrants in the state, with final deportation orders issued by a judge.

Getting rid of criminal illegal immigrants helps cut down on crime and save lives, DeSantis said.

“You’re really making a difference in your community,” he said.

Some 11 million illegal immigrants were apprehended at U.S. borders over the past four years, according to Customs and Border Protection data.

Trump campaigned on border security and illegal immigrant deportations. Upon returning to the White House, he has moved to keep that promise through a whole-of-government approach that has included designating several Mexican cartels and other transnational criminal groups as terrorist organizations. As a result, some members of the MS-13 and Tren de Aragua gangs have been deported to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, known as CECOT.

As of May 8, ICE statistics show there are 531 agreements with state and local agencies throughout the country. Another 105 applications are pending.

Although dozens of states have agreements under the 287(g) program, Florida is the first to have its law enforcement officers credentialed.

U.S. military personnel escort alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and the MS-13 gang recently deported by the U.S. government to be imprisoned in the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) prison as part of an agreement with the Salvadoran government, in San Luis Talpa, El Salvador, on March 30, 2025. Office of the President's Press Secretary/Reuters

Law enforcement nationwide has been encouraged to sign up for 287(g) agreements by the Trump administration because there are not enough federal officers to find and process millions of illegal immigrants.

Besides the task force model, the federal government created the jail enforcement model and the warrant service officer model.

The jail enforcement model allows local officers to identify and process removable noncitizens already booked into local jails. The warrant service officer model allows officers to serve and execute administrative warrants on illegal immigrants already in custody.

Florida had 266 agreements that included all 67 sheriff’s offices in the state, according to the Florida Sheriffs Association. Texas had the second-highest number of agreements at 77.

As home prices continue to climb and mortgage rates remain elevated, buying a home in the U.S. has become increasingly out of reach for the average household.

In 2025, buyers now need six-figure salaries to afford a median-priced home in all but 15 states.

This visualization, via Visual Capitalist's Bruno Venditti, using data from Realtor.com, maps the annual income required to purchase a typical three-bedroom home in every state, based on a 10% down payment, a 6.65% interest rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage, and a 30% income-to-housing cost threshold (which includes taxes and insurance).

The Growing Gap Between Income and Home Prices

A recent study found that nearly 50% of U.S. households cannot afford a home priced at $250,000. This is particularly concerning when the median price of a new single-family home nationwide has reached $495,750, according to the National Association of Home Builders.

In many states, the income needed to comfortably afford a median-priced home far exceeds what a typical family earns.

Where Buying a Home Requires the Highest Salaries

Here are the top five most expensive states for homebuyers in 2025:

Hawaii tops the list, where buying a median three-bedroom home requires an annual income of $229,000—the highest in the country. Despite its small population, Montana has climbed into the top five least affordable states, driven by a widening gap between soaring home prices and relatively modest local incomes.

In contrast, in West Virginia a buyer would need a salary of just $71,000 to afford a median-priced home—well below the state’s median household income of $90,000. Other states with lower thresholds include Mississippi, Ohio, and Indiana.

What’s the cost of a median price in every U.S. state? Find out in this map on Voronoi.

Authored by Jack Philips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Supreme Court’s chief justice on Monday told an event that criticism of the court should be relegated to its decisions and not the nine justices themselves.

Chief Justice John Roberts attends the State of the Union address in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Feb. 7, 2023. Jacquelyn Martin/Pool/Getty Images

While speaking at Washington’s Georgetown University, Chief Justice John Roberts said that the Supreme Court “has obviously made mistakes throughout its history, and those should be criticized, so long as it is in terms of the decision.”

Roberts said that criticism of the highest court should not be based on “ad hominem” arguments or attacks “against the justices” themselves, referring to the logical fallacy where an argument is dismissed based on the character or background of the individual making that claim.

“I just think that doesn’t do any good. The harshest critics are usually colleagues, if it’s the sort of thing where there are dissents. So it’s something we’re used to,” he continued. “And again, it’s a good thing. We’re not immune from any criticism. And there are many, many instances in our history where it’s been effective over time in leading to a better result.”

The comment from Roberts marks the third time in nearly as many months in response to criticism about the Supreme Court.

In a rare written statement in March, Roberts appeared to respond to President Donald Trump’s public suggestion to impeach a federal judge who had blocked his administration’s deportations of accused Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said in a statement provided to The Epoch Times at the time. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

Following U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s initial ruling against the administration’s use of the 1798 law to deport accused gang members, Trump wrote that the judge wasn’t elected as president.

A senior adviser to Trump, tech billionaire Elon Musk, also commented on the judge’s stymying the administration’s agenda. In a post on Feb. 25, Musk wrote that the only way to allow the agenda to move forward is to “impeach judges,” responding to an article that said El Salvador’s president did the same starting in 2021.

Trump hasn’t been critical of the Supreme Court and has indicated that he will follow orders from any court. Since the start of his administration, numerous lawsuits have been filed against his administration, particularly in relation to his immigration enforcement, spending cuts, and efforts to downsize and reshape the federal government.

And last week, Roberts said during an event in Buffalo, New York, that the judiciary needs to maintain its independence in order to check executive or congressional power.

The judicial branch’s independence is “the only real political-science innovation in our Constitution,” Roberts said. Elaborating, he said that “in our Constitution … the judiciary is a co-equal branch of government, separate from the others, with the authority to interpret the Constitution as law and strike down … acts of Congress or acts of the president.”

“And that innovation doesn’t work if … the judiciary is not independent. Its job is to … check the excesses of Congress or of the executive, and that does require a degree of independence,” he said.

In his recent remarks and written statement, Roberts did not mention Trump, nor did he mention any other elected official.

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Trump administration is taking aim at automatic engine start-stop systems—technology installed in millions of U.S. vehicles to reduce fuel use and emissions—with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin signaling plans to roll back incentives for the feature that he says drivers despise.

People wait to drive through the Holland Tunnel into New York during morning rush hour in Jersey City, N.J., on March 8, 2023. Ted Shaffrey/AP Photo

“Start/stop technology: where your car dies at every red light so companies get a climate participation trophy,” Zeldin wrote in a May 12 post on social media. “EPA approved it, and everyone hates it, so we’re fixing it.”

Zeldin’s announcement comes amid a broader shift under President Donald Trump, whose administration has moved aggressively to dismantle a range of environmental rules it says put pointless burdens on energy producers, manufacturers, and consumers.

While the EPA doesn’t require start-stop systems, it has granted automakers fuel economy credits for adopting the technology. Zeldin’s post suggests the agency may eliminate or revise those incentives, though officials have yet to announce formal policy changes.

The EPA declined to provide details of any plans to revise or eliminate existing incentives in response to an inquiry from The Epoch Times.

Start-stop systems are designed to automatically shut off a vehicle’s engine when it stops—at a red light, for example—and restart it when the driver releases the brake. Proponents say the technology helps reduce emissions and saves drivers money at the pump by improving fuel economy. Critics say that it’s annoying, unnecessary, and sometimes difficult to disable. In most vehicles, drivers must press a button to turn the feature off each time they start the car.

The feature became increasingly common under fuel efficiency rules implemented during the Obama administration, expanding from fewer than 1 percent of new vehicles in 2012 to about 45 percent in model year 2021, according to EPA data. The agency notes on its website that start-stop systems can improve fuel economy by up to 5 percent, with the biggest benefits under stop-and-go city driving.

An Obama-era regulatory impact analysis from 2012 estimated that start-stop systems can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 1.8 percent to 2.4 percent, depending on vehicle type and size, compared with baseline models. The systems have helped cut nearly 10 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year, according to The Battery Council International.

Zeldin’s remarks come as the Trump administration pursues a sweeping deregulatory agenda across multiple agencies.

On May 9, Trump directed agencies to rescind federal water efficiency standards for household appliances such as showerheads, toilets, dishwashers, and washing machines—calling them relics of a “radical green agenda” that reduced performance and increased costs.

“The federal government should not impose or enforce regulations that make taxpayers’ lives worse,” Trump wrote in a memo, saying the rules made appliances less useful, more prone to failure, and costlier to fix.

The Department of Energy has also begun rolling back efficiency rules for outdoor heaters, decorative hearth products, and other miscellaneous appliances. In each case, the administration says it is eliminating unnecessary regulations and restoring consumer choice, while environmental advocates say the changes could undermine years of progress on conservation and fighting climate change.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, the Department of Energy is returning to common sense–and that means giving the American people the ability to choose which heaters they use in their own backyards,” Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said in a May 2 statement. “To date, rescinding or delaying unnecessary consumer regulations such as this have saved the taxpayers nearly $24 billion–and we’re just getting started.”

The EPA’s expected rollback of incentives for start-stop systems would mark another high-profile pivot away from the climate policies of previous administrations.

Authored by Paul D. Thacker via the DisInformation Chronicle,

A brief flurry of media reports last month criticized letters sent to medical journals by Edward R. Martin Jr., the former interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, who questioned whether journals have become “partisans in various scientific debates.” One liberal academic called the letters “fascist tactics” designed “to intimidate academic journals” triggering similar allegations across the media.

“Experts worry this will have a chilling effect on publications,” reported the New York Times, noting that an obscure journal called CHEST had been targeted.

“DOJ questions science journal about bias, triggering free-speech concerns,” reported the Washington Post, adding that three major publishers of medical journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine and Health Affairs, said they had not received letters, while publisher Springer Nature chose not to comment. NPR reported last week that the New England Journal of Medicine had in fact received a letter as had the American Medical Association’s journal JAMA.

The DisInformation Chronicle has learned that the actual target of Martin’s letters is the Nature Springer journal Nature Medicine, publisher of a highly controversial paper “Proximal Origin” which has faced charges of corruption and calls for retraction. A source inside the Department of Health and Human Services said Trump officials suspect the paper is a quid pro quo, written by the authors to dismiss the possibility of a lab accident and who then received a large grant months later from Tony Fauci.

The existence of the Nature Medicine letter has not been previously reported and is being made public for the first time. After Martin lost support among Republicans to be confirmed as U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, President Trump picked him to head a new Weaponization Working Group inside the Justice Department.

Follow the science

Published in the third month of the COVID pandemic and arguing “we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible,” the “Proximal Origin” paper became a handy tool for NIH officials and virologists attempting to dismiss as a “conspiracy theory” claims that the pandemic could have started in a Wuhan lab funded by Fauci. Nature Medicine’s editor-in-chief, Joao Monteiro, tweeted that the paper “put conspiracy theories” about the pandemic’s possible lab origin to rest.

NIH Director Francis Collins promoted the “Proximal Origin” paper weeks after Nature Medicine published it on his March 2020 NIH Director's Blog, and Fauci then seized upon the paper during a televised White House briefing a month afterwards.

“There was a study recently that we can make available to you,” Fauci said during the White House briefing, “where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists look at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve and the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of species from an animal to a human.”

The paper would go on to become one of the most heavily cited scientific papers in 2020. The Nation reported in 2023 that “Proximal Origin” had been accessed online more than 5.7 million times and more than 2,000 media outlets had cited it. ABC News, for instance, ran an article titled “Sorry, Conspiracy Theorists. Study Concludes Covid-19 ‘Is Not a Laboratory Construct.’”

But by then, cracks had already appeared.

Follow the money, follow the documents

Emails made public through freedom of information act requests and by congressional investigators in 2022 showed that the papers’ authors had run it past funders—Francis Collins and Tony Fauci at the NIH, as well as with Jeremy Farrar, who was then at the Wellcome Trust. In one example, lead author Kristian Andersen with the Scripps Research Institute emailed the three funders thanking them for their “advice and leadership” and offering them a right to comment and give suggestions.

Further emails and internal slack discussions calling into question the credibility of “Proximal Origin” became public in the summer of 2023 following a congressional hearing. During the hearing, Republicans charged that Tony Fauci had helped orchestrate the paper’s publication. However, Democrats countered by releasing a report that found Wellcome Trust’s Jeremy Farrar helped “organize and facilitate” and “led the drafting process of the paper.”

“Jeremy, Dr. Farrar has been an amazing leader,” wrote “Proximal Origin” co-author Robert Garry of Tulane University in an email released by House Democrats. “Should be author.”

When questioned about his email during a House deposition, Garry agreed that Farrar should have been listed as an author.

According to Nature’s editorial policy, “A specific role for the funder in the conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript, should be disclosed.” However, the paper failed to note the involvement of either Fauci or Farrar, and Nature Medicine has refused to follow its own ethics guidelines.

News sites the Racket and Public co-published a slack message Andersen sent to his “Proximal Origin” co-authors on April 16, 2020, a month after Nature Medicine published the paper in March 2020.

“I’m still not fully convinced that no culture was involved,” Andersen wrote his co-authors, a month after publishing the paper that concluded the virus was not a laboratory construct. “We also can't fully rule out engineering (for basic research).”

Days after the congressional hearing, the group BioSafety Now wrote a letter to Nature Medicine, signed by over 50 scientists, demanding retraction of “Proximal Origin.” The letter cited an investigation published by The Nation reporting on internal emails by the “Proximal Origin” authors that showed they didn’t even believe what they wrote in the paper.

“The main issue is that accidental release is in fact highly likely,” the Nation reported that Andersen wrote in a message to co-authors some weeks before Nature Medicine published the paper. An online campaign by BioSafety Now has since garnered over 5,700 signatures petitioning Nature Medicine to retract the paper.

In his letter to Nature Medicine, Martin wrote that he has been told that some journals “have a position for which they are advocating due to advertisement (under postal code) or sponsorship (under relevant fraud regulations).”

The letter also asks, “How do you clearly articulate to the public when you have certain viewpoints that are influenced by your ongoing relations with supporters, funders, advertisers, and others?”

A source close to the investigation said this question pertains to a grant Fauci awarded Andersen and Garry several months after they published “Proximal Origin” dismissing the possibility of a lab accident. Allegations that this grant was a bribe from Fauci have dogged Andersen for several years, accusations which he dismissed under oath during the July 2023 congressional hearing.

“There is no connection between the grant and the conclusions we reached about the origin of the pandemic,” Andersen wrote in sworn testimony to Congress. “We applied for this grant in June 2019, and it was scored and reviewed by independent experts in November 2019.”

The Intercept later reported that Andersen “knew that was false.” NIH records show the grant to Andersen wasn’t finalized until May 21, 2020, two months after Andersen published “Proximal Origin” in Nature Medicine.

In a guest essay earlier this month for The DisInformation Chronicle, an NIH infectious disease researcher wrote that the “Proximal Origin” authors left a gaping hole in their analysis by failing to account for a common method to manipulate viruses called “serial passaging.”

“And because they didn’t discuss this very common laboratory practice, they did not ‘disprove’ a laboratory origin for the virus,” the NIH research official wrote. “I have no idea how ignoring something so obvious could make it pass peer review and get published in a prestigious journal like Nature Medicine.”

Subscribe to The DisInformation Chronicle here...