“I love America,” Michigan’s US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed insists.

That’s as fake as the “y’alls” he sprinkled into his speech on Saturday, as he pandered to an African-American audience at a rally featuring Barack Obama.

And it’s only one of El-Sayed’s lies.

His paper trail of academic writings, published long before he ran for any political office, shows what he actually believes.

The consistent theme is a shrill warning that if you’re Arab-American, assimilating into American society is dangerous to your health.

El-Sayed has a toxic view of the rest of America.

Eleven Muslim-Americans are running for Congress in next week’s midterm elections — overall, a positive sign that one of the nation’s fastest-growing immigrant groups is buying into our political values.

Several of these candidates, like Zuhdi Jasser in Arizona, are fine people.

But El -Sayed is a phony.

As a medical student at Columbia University (he graduated but never completed his residency to qualify to practice), El-Sayed wrote a string of papers purporting to prove that Arab-Americans who blend into American society face numerous risks — from giving birth prematurely to succumbing to suicide.

His message to fellow Muslim-Americans is clear: Live in America, but do not become American.

In a 2011 paper published in the Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, El-Sayed warned of the hazards of “interethnic mating” — that is, having a child with a non-Arab.

Looking at 21,621 births to Arab mothers in Michigan, El-Sayed found that those who conceived a child with a non-Arab man had an 18% greater risk of premature birth.

The article has all the trappings of a scientific study, but why research this at all?

Possibly because under Sharia law, Muslim women are barred from marrying outside the faith.

“Maternal and paternal ethnic/racial heterogeneity” may be “associated with increased risk for adverse birth outcomes,” El-Sayed wrote.

But the research was fatally flawed, because it didn’t fully account for other factors.

Arab women who had children with non-Arab men tended to be older and more likely to smoke, both differences that could cause higher premature birth rates.

In another study, El-Sayed aimed to prove that living in an all-Muslim community, apart from other Americans, protects Arab women from the discrimination and stress that cause prematurity.

He argued that pregnant Arab women in Detroit, living in a dense ethnically homogeneous enclave, fared better than Arab women in California following 9/11.

Here’s another doozy — El-Sayed’s study of suicide among Arab-Americans in Michigan.

Suicide rates were lower in Wayne County, where Arabs live in dense enclaves, than in the rest of the state, where the Arab population mixes in with other groups.

El-Sayed credited the virtues of “ethnic density” and, again, Sharia law for this result — because it considers suicide to be haram or forbidden, he argued.

He didn’t mention that this is true in most religions, including Roman Catholicism.

And he slyly omitted mention of other possible factors, such as the socioeconomic status of the suicide victims in his study.

His papers on suicide and premature birth typify the pseudo-science he concocted to support the notion that Arab-Americans should live apart in ethnic enclaves, rather than join the American melting pot.

That’s not an idea Michigan voters should support.

Segregated Muslim enclaves spawn jihadism.

In countries like Belgium, France and Sweden, residential clusters of marginalized Muslim groups have become breeding grounds for radicalism.

It’s essential to discourage this separatism, and to monitor the threats coming out of these enclaves as far as the US Constitution will allow — not to promote it with scientific blather, as El-Sayed has done.

El-Sayed’s flat-out lies even extend to his main campaign promise, which he repeats at every stop: Medicare for All.

In his debate with Republican rival Mike Rogers on Oct. 8, El-Sayed was asked if the 210 million Americans who have private insurance, mostly through an employer, could keep it under his scheme.

 “Yes, absolutely,” he answered. “If families want to keep their private health insurance, that’s fine by me.”

False — according to El-Sayed’s own book about Medicare for All, published in 2021, in which he explained that the government would have to be the only insurer.   

But as a politician, he finds it hard to tell the truth.

El-Sayed isn’t leveling with seniors, admitting to them that they’d be the biggest losers under Medicare for All.

They’d have to compete with younger Americans for access to expensive treatments.

Seniors would find that with fewer years remaining, they’ll be told to settle for rationed care, as they are today in countries like Canada.

Michigan voters need to demand honest answers from the slick-talking anti-American “Doctor” El-Sayed — before it’s too late.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York.