Latest emails show--surprise!--researchers orchestrated an article to denigrate a Wuhan lab leak as a "conspiracy" disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/why-do-peopl… Will science publisher Taylor and Francis retract an unethical, secretly edited article that appears to have skated past peer review? /1 
The article “No credible evidence supporting claims of the laboratory engineering of SARS-CoV-2" was secretly edited by Ralph Baric of UNC & Shi Zhengli of Wuhan.
Surprise! Both do genetic engineering of coronaviruses! disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/why-do-peopl… /2
Surprise! Both do genetic engineering of coronaviruses! disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/why-do-peopl… /2
When asked to submit his edits, Ralph Baric emailed, “Sure, but don’t want to be cited in as having commented prior to submission.”
Baric wasn't acknowledged.
Baric wasn't acknowledged.
According to emails among the authors, it also seems the Taylor and Francis journals have a policy of "super fast peer review (basically no peer review)". /3
The article alleging it was a "conspiracy theory" to say the pandemic could have started in a lab was a hit, with over 75,000 downloads.
"Many congratulations!" wrote a Taylor and Francis rep to the author, promising more promotion to reporters on social medial. /4
"Many congratulations!" wrote a Taylor and Francis rep to the author, promising more promotion to reporters on social medial. /4
The article certainly charmed reporters, as it got play in the News & Observer, Buzzfeed, and The Week in passages that downplayed a possible lab accident for starting the pandemic. @DisInfoChron disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/why-do-peopl… /5
The Taylor and Francis authorship policies are very clear in requiring acknowledgement of all contributors. authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/editorial-poli… But it is unclear if Taylor and Francis will do anything. /END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
