In this edition of #scifraud: Ronald Kostoff, an octogenarian generalist w/ a 1000-meter stare, has a fraudulent article in the latest _Toxicology Reports_ claiming Covid vaccines kill 5x more people than they save.
How could @ElsevierConnect publish such deadly nonsense? /1
How could @ElsevierConnect publish such deadly nonsense? /1
@ElsevierConnect Here's the article, full of scare quotes, conspiracy buzzwords, and bad data.
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
How did this pass peer review? Journal editor @aristsatsakis surely knows better. But this fraud is already the most-talked about article Toxicol.Rep. has published all year. /2
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
How did this pass peer review? Journal editor @aristsatsakis surely knows better. But this fraud is already the most-talked about article Toxicol.Rep. has published all year. /2
Encouraging volume over quality is one culprit.
Toxicol. Rep. launched as an #Elsevier journal in 2014, and has no fewer than thirty-one Associate Editors.
One of them (Daniela Calina), and editor in chief Tsatsakis, CO-AUTHORED this bizarre & deceptive article. /3
Toxicol. Rep. launched as an #Elsevier journal in 2014, and has no fewer than thirty-one Associate Editors.
One of them (Daniela Calina), and editor in chief Tsatsakis, CO-AUTHORED this bizarre & deceptive article. /3
Another is a common failure mode of low-quality peer review: closed circles who edit & publish one another.
Kostoff publishes regularly in the journal, sometimes w/ Tsatsakis as co-author, who often reviews his papers. Was this piece accepted w/o reading it? /4
Kostoff publishes regularly in the journal, sometimes w/ Tsatsakis as co-author, who often reviews his papers. Was this piece accepted w/o reading it? /4
Or – 14 of Kostoff's last 17 papers were with Tsatsakis… including a 5G-truther paper, far from his expertise. Now we're in classic #scifraud territory – is the editor just racking up a paper count w/ willing co-authors, and fast-tracking them? /5
aminer.org/profile/ronald…
aminer.org/profile/ronald…
Because the paper's mistakes are not subtle. The topline mortality comparison is off by a factor of /a million/; the appendix doubles down + implies no one should vax.
Somehow I don't think biochemist Darja Kanduc agrees, despite being on the author list. /6
Somehow I don't think biochemist Darja Kanduc agrees, despite being on the author list. /6
This case stings. Kostoff cites prolifically, and spent a decade exploring text mining for ideas – an approach which one wishes would work, but can find support for any crank theory + may be a recipe for penetrating peer review. /7
https://twitter.com/emax/status/1441570793398353920
Strongly reminiscent of the Walach papers that were published and retracted from _Vaccines_ and _JAMA Ped._ in July. But data here has been massaged more strongly, and more false claims chained together.
cc @RetractionWatch, ht @hmatejx. 8/8
https://mobile.twitter.com/metasj/status/1414098161031917568
cc @RetractionWatch, ht @hmatejx. 8/8
UPDATE: #Elsevier wrote to acknowledge concerns w/ three articles (the Kostoff anti-vax fraud; his 2d article listing vaccines as a contributing factor for IBS; the Ivermectin ➖ result w/ control group of size 3, framed as a ➕ result). I'll share anything that comes of it. /9
This abuse of peer review is a result of current scholarly metrics & the lack of accountability for authors, editors, or journals. It is not unique to journal farms like Elsev. I'm curious what metamoderation exists within their network.
And deeply glad @TRANSPOSEsci exists.
And deeply glad @TRANSPOSEsci exists.
After public outcry, Tox. Reports has retroactively replaced Tsatsakis as handling editor for his own articles, including the Kostoff fraud.
This cannot be changed after the fact.
Those 3 articles should be retracted & re-reviewed. /10
This cannot be changed after the fact.
Those 3 articles should be retracted & re-reviewed. /10
https://twitter.com/jsm2334/status/1443300430801481731
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
