Thread by @Indrroy

@RetractionWatch 1. As the Exit strategy via #vaccine became clearer, the journal IJEST #springer @SpringerNature decided to retract my paper on #COVID19, published 19th Nov, received 5 citations (first preprint 17th March, 2020). @Indrroy @C0PE @levent_k_elpen

Paper: tinyurl.com/yzf3h8de

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 2. The Supplementary section of the paper:
1.Solution slide (attached).
2.Presentation: tinyurl.com/yvsth7sy

Results are consistent if more countries are included. Studies using different statistical techniques also confirmed that. Thus main findings of the study are robust.

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 3.Retraction letter @SpringerNature mentioned

‘#solution may not be safe. In order to protect public health, the content has been removed’

Though in the paper, I mentioned the term ‘keeping Comfort level’ (check attached solution slide) and included a caution part in the text

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 4.Question: How can anyone find these simple #Solution unsafe? Whereas, there are many adverse effects reported in #vaccines (even deaths) and those are considered ‘small sacrifice for better good’.

Most importantly my #solutions for #COVID19 are without any vested interest!

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 5. Can anyone see any solid scientific basis for retraction? What are specific issues? Is it a fair judgment to #retract this crucial paper? Is #transparency maintained?

If it is retracted then 90% of #COVID19 papers need #retraction on the same ground, I can spot very easily.

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 6. I was told one post-publication #reviewer raised an issue who wants to remain anonymous. In journal submission, there is an option of opposing reviewers.

It needs to be verified whether that reviewer has any #conflict of #interest with me (I strongly request to investigate).

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 7. The name&review to be disclosed publicly as s/he needs to be accountable for what issues are raised and other scientists can judge my point-wise response too. Ethical scientists will check whether it is worth retracting after 8 months (5 citations) and how serious is concern.

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 8. Moreover, how to ensure that #vested #interest groups are not overpowering the process of #scientific #integrity and #transparency?

Check: tinyurl.com/3jj737np

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen 9. Is there any issues for testing phase #COVID19 vaccines to be finally APPROVED for mass usage, if any possible #solutions are out there?

A highly popular BMJ paper @bmj_latest raised issues on vaccine trial experiments even before start of mass usage bj.com/content/371/bm…

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen @bmj_latest 10. #solutions in #retracted paper are without side effects, no vested interest.

If simple heat-based #Solution at initial stages of disease become popular then people, govt don't need to worry about mutated variants, long #COVID, losing immunity after 6 months, lockdown etc.

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen @bmj_latest 11. A pragmatic policy-relevant document I first submitted in journal at beginning of Mar 2021.

The latest preprint:
‘Exit Strategy from COVID-19: Vaccination and an Alternative Solution’
tinyurl.com/a97hr85p

Very easy to understand by common people!

#COVID19, #Solution

@RetractionWatch @SpringerNature @C0PE @levent_k_elpen @bmj_latest @threadreaderapp unroll