Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
1–10 of 48 posts
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#2Here is a list of retracted Covid-19 papers, as collated by Retraction Watch:
https://retractionwatch.com/retracted-coronavirus-covid-19-p...
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#3The biggest scandal so far: a retraction paper for the SARS-CoV-19 PCR test was submitted in November 2020 but ignored so far. The retraction paper is here:
https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#4The biggest scandal so far: a retraction paper for the SARS-CoV-19 PCR test was submitted in November 2020 but ignored so far. The retraction paper is here: https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
This appears to be a totally unrelated set of authors attempting to force a journal to retract someone else’s paper. They literally have a dedicated website to promote this retraction and if you look up the authors, some of them headline their Twitter with it. The first author just today posted on Twitter that mRNA vaccines can alter your DNA.
The intent of the retraction seems to be to suggest that the epidemic is overblown, to which I would respond by pointing to the the two million dead people, and the excellent correlation of positive test results with new dead people.
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#5So why is not every paper that cites a retracted paper automatically flagged? THe peer reviewing process seems to have a lot of room for improvement.
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#6The biggest scandal so far: a retraction paper for the SARS-CoV-19 PCR test was submitted in November 2020 but ignored so far. The retraction paper is here: https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
I just checked the twitter account of the first author (who does not seem to be currently affiliated with any scientific institution). I can only understand his German and English tweets. He likes to push his own book, retweeted a post claiming "just stop testing for the virus and people will die of influenza again", and calls other peoples work pseudoscience.
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#7The biggest scandal so far: a retraction paper for the SARS-CoV-19 PCR test was submitted in November 2020 but ignored so far. The retraction paper is here: https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
I just checked the twitter account of the first author (who does not seem to be currently affiliated with any scientific institution). I can only understand his German and English tweets. He likes to push his own book, retweeted a post claiming "just stop testing for the virus and people will die of influenza again", and calls other peoples work pseudoscience.
Why don't you talk about the 10 points that the scientists state to argue that the test is flawed? And what do you have to say about the other 21 scientists? What do you have to say about the former Pfizer chief scientist which is co-author?
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#8Here is a list of retracted Covid-19 papers, as collated by Retraction Watch: https://retractionwatch.com/retracted-coronavirus-covid-19-p...
It would be nice if retraction watch publicly messaged those who cite retracted papers and publicly logged their responses.
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just checked the twitter account of the first author (who does not seem to be currently affiliated with any scientific institution). I can only understand his German and English tweets. He likes to push his own book, retweeted a post claiming "just stop testing for the virus and people will die of influenza again", and calls other peoples work pseudoscience.
Why don't you talk about the 10 points that the scientists state to argue that the test is flawed? And what do you have to say about the other 21 scientists? What do you have to say about the former Pfizer chief scientist which is co-author?
Here's a fairly exhaustive rebuttal: https://mobile.twitter.com/BMauschen/status/1333466298072911...
I'll leave the translation up to the readers.
That former Pfizer guy apparently claimed in October that the coronavirus pandemic is “effectively over” in the United Kingdom. Clearly a man with special insights.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/02/blog-posti...
Re: Many scientists citing two scandalous Covid-19 papers ignore their retractions
#10The biggest scandal so far: a retraction paper for the SARS-CoV-19 PCR test was submitted in November 2020 but ignored so far. The retraction paper is here: https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
This appears to be a totally unrelated set of authors attempting to force a journal to retract someone else’s paper. They literally have a dedicated website to promote this retraction and if you look up the authors, some of them headline their Twitter with it. The first author just today posted on Twitter that mRNA vaccines can alter your DNA. The intent of the retraction seems to be to suggest that the epidemic is o…
Is the retracted paper correct? That’s the only question that matters. And perhaps those scientists have developed their views by actually looking at the science? Is that possible? Don’t shoot the messenger.