So was Wakefield rightfully scrutinized and Drosten given a hall pass?
Many of the concerns raised about Wakefields qPCR are significant. But the one most cited (contamination) by Dr. Bustin was not.
He claimed Wakefield omitted an RT-Step.
Bustin is emulating this in 2020.
Wakefield is also nailed for Lack of an SOP.
Same story in the Drosten review.
The proper way to address DNA or RNA contamination is with DNases and RNases.
RT enzymes are active at RTemp and as the cycler ramps its temperature up to 95C.
#BustinBusted nature.com/articles/s4159…
@threadreaderapp unroll
Bustin continues to push for limited to No RT step in qPCR.
Precisely what he persecuted Wakefield for…and was paid handsomely for the testimony he has since contradicted.
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🔥Scientific Misconduct and Plagiarism from Dr. Richard Fleming🔥.
The Journal has been made aware of Richard Fleming plagiarizing our primer sequences and not citing them.
I normally wouldn't care. They are open source but the same primer table in @DJSpeicher et al contained the SV40 primer sequences he NEVER used while still claiming SV40 was not detected. He claimed this 3 times but never actually tested for SV40.
Irony.. Fleming was bragging about his work was peer reviewed.
Or Peer stolen, twisted and obfuscated... but to what ends? Who does Fleming work for and did he copy these sequences and refuse to cite the work while spreading non sense about the SV40 sequences?
What are the odds they picked the same primers by chance?