The manuscript titled “Vacuoles of Candida yeast behave as a specialized niche for Helicobacter pylori ( H. pylori)” not only has not been prepared in a scientific manner but the methodology used was not adequate, and therefore the conclusion reached was not correct. First of all, “yeast” is a broad terminology covering a great number of genera and species of unicellular micro-organisms. The authors should have defined the organism with its binary scientific name. This measure would allow experiment reproduction by the scientific community. Moreover, the criteria established by Robert Koch to identify a specific microorganism or pathogen was not adopted in the methodology used. Regarding the methodology applied, use of the chicken egg-yolk (IgY) antibody and PCR of the apparently tainted yeast population to prove H. pylori existence in the yeast vacuoles might be main factors for their wrong conclusions. Bacterial tropism toward yeast extract is a known phenomenon, and yeast extract is one of the main ingredients in culture media. Their internalization through phagocytosis or similar pathways does not seem possible or practical because of the thick and cellulosic yeast wall. While the small size of yeast cells does not support their ability in harboring several H. pylori, other observations such as inefficiency of anti-fungal therapy as anti- Helicobacter therapy strongly reject the conclusion reached by the above-mentioned article.