It’s been a minute since I milked a Jeff Childers post (Moooo!), but this was too good to pass up. ““Retraction of the Research Article “SARS-CoV-2 S2–targeted vaccination elicits broadly neutralizing antibodies.”
This was not a minor study. Cited as authoritative in eighty-three other studies, it had twenty-one authors including PhD student Kevin W. Ng, his supervising professor, and over a dozen more from the prestigious Francis Crick Institute in London.
This makes the second paper to be retracted this year with Kevin’s name attached; now a third is under review (published in Nature). Only Kevin went under the bus; and having gone down there, he is accumulating scandals faster than a teenager finding something to do on chore night.
Can you see why it caught my eye? It was cited in 83 studies, and then it was retracted; thus, my headline, and you all know this isn’t the first bit of bad news for the Jabasaurus, passport-panicked progressive privacy pirates.
Why the retraction? Among other things, fabricated data and falsified images. And people wonder why we don’t trust “the science.”
What prompted the authors and Kevin W. Ng and the researchers to lie? Maybe they weren’t doctors or researchers but COVID Influencers, or they wanted to be. To bask in the shadow of the Big Pharma money tree, or, more likely, they already were, benefiting from the tree that is always in autumn, which is why they fabricated data and images.
To be clear, you should distrust the alternative science, too. Many “professionals,” more than a few of them actual doctors of medicine or someone with a related health certification, took to the internet to contradict science as an exercise in science. Many others used it to grow their audience and sell you shit.
Our standard of care is to do your own research and then keep doing it. Don’t land somewhere and assume that science is your science, is the science. That’d be hypocritical, which means the defrocking of a research paper that lied about broadly neutralizing antibodies, and the 83 papers that cited it (to be reviewed for future retraction, perhaps), is just one link in the same chain.
Scientific research papers have been crap since before COVID; the response to The PandemicTM just exposed the frauds in the system and an entire political party (Democrats) who absolutely refused to take a vaccine that didn’t exist yet while Trump was president but demanded you take it when Biden was.
That’s political science, and almost always crap.
COVID Lore has suffered mightily, but the shamans who read the entrails are mum on how badly they did, so the response to a major retraction of a major paper cited by a lot of “experts” in the name of ‘Science’ won’t attract much attention outside the usual alternative media circles.
The offices of the experts who cited it in 83 other papers might want to take notice, but as with most institutions infiltrated by politics and the left, the best course is to ignore it, keep yelling lies, and wait until you can erase evidence that contradicts what you’ve been shouting and anyone who has dared to repeat it.
That was as much “the response to COVID” as the medical doctrines that time has taken to the woodshed, and those tactics will never change. The retractions are an exercise in learning how not to get caught lying next time, either by becoming a better liar or by gaining more control over the institutions we are told we have to trust.
