1/Just had an interview scheduled with @goddeketal, Dr Simon Goddek, the post-doctoral researcher at the Faculty of Mathematics and Statistics in the field of biotechnology, at an unnamed Dutch university. This researcher has been publicly pointing out that the paper that...

2/ the PCR test as the gold standard underlying global "lockdowns" was passed after maximum ONE day of peer review, as opposed to the average at that same journal of 172 days in 2019. Also that several authors have conflicts of interest. Unfortunately we were forced to cancel..
3/ because he was strongly advised by his university to maintain silence and not speak publicly -- to step back from this issue. I learned from a source that his university was heavily assailed by many complaints. Other scientists who have signed the review criticizing the PRC..
4/test, the "Retraction Request Letter", a critique that got worldwide attention, have also been bombarded with attacks, their relatives are being called at night, and their universities assailed. Some are at risk of losing jobs. Even former employers are being harassed. I..
5/ Note : scientists around the world are being silenced and harassed if they speak up in normal criticism of the scientific methods or conclusions used to advance the lockdown agenda and COVID testing. This is not post-enlightenment scientific discourse, this is how scientists
6/ are treated in police states and totalitarian societies. I also note that this strategy of repetitional attacks in which organized campaigns of harassment and complaint are aimed at people's publishers, universities and employers in order to silence them, is a tool being ...
7/ directed systematically against commentators in what should normal debate and open dialogue. It happened to me, to Dr Michael Mann, and now these campaigns of harassment are being directed at scientists whose findings reveal possible huge flaws in COVID related research. When
8/ universities and publishers give in to this kind of bullying and harassment, I know it is tempting to do so and step out of the line of fire, but from having studied closing societies, it will be six months before they too are forced to swallow a party line and before all real
9/ scientific enquiry, all real journalism, all open debate, is closed forever. I beg this unnamable university to allow this analyst to speak to me and to the world which wants to hear what he has to say as the Enlightenment taught us was valuable in assessing data, information.

More from Science

@mugecevik is an excellent scientist and a responsible professional. She likely read the paper more carefully than most. She grasped some of its strengths and weaknesses that are not apparent from a cursory glance. Below, I will mention a few points some may have missed.
1/


The paper does NOT evaluate the effect of school closures. Instead it conflates all ‘educational settings' into a single category, which includes universities.
2/

The paper primarily evaluates data from March and April 2020. The article is not particularly clear about this limitation, but the information can be found in the hefty supplementary material.
3/


The authors applied four different regression methods (some fancier than others) to the same data. The outcomes of the different regression models are correlated (enough to reach statistical significance), but they vary a lot. (heat map on the right below).
4/


The effect of individual interventions is extremely difficult to disentangle as the authors stress themselves. There is a very large number of interventions considered and the model was run on 49 countries and 26 US States (and not >200 countries).
5/

You May Also Like