🧵
What is the probability that .@sarahjestock - who is the Program Director of @WellcomeLeap - should be randomly the corresponding author on a paper that she didn't write, relating to datasets that can't be audited, showing "no pregnancy problems with mRNA vaccines"?
And what is the probability that @sarahjestock has written 50 papers in 2 years whilst being a full time obstetrician, university professor at two universities, program director at @WellcomeLeap...
And in her papers declares no conflicts of interest...
It's hit and miss, you see. When it's a pregnancy in vaccine paper there are no conflicts of interest. When it's another paper, we'll declare them but they aren't really conflicts because they are just Pharma so that's fine
And can you believe it? Sarah Stock - whose name is on over 100 papers - just happened to team up with Colin Simpson in 2020!
What a coincidence!
And these are the two players behind the Scottish COVID vaccine in pregnancy data
The HDRUK Impact of the Year award 2021?
Really?
They kept that quiet.
So you went from teacher's pet at Nicole Junkermann's and Matt Hancock's HDRUK...
Which is infamous for its links to Jeffrey Epstein via Nicole Junkermann
To be in charge of New Zealand's Electronic Health Data.
Oh good. I'm sure New Zealanders can now sleep easy knowing that their health data is getting the "HDRUK" treatment and being pawned off to Pharma to create synthetic data sets to sell more drugs that don't work? #EMRgate
And it's so pleasing to see such collaboration and obviously with all your awards it's understandable that you don't remember to declare your conflicts of interest.
So let me ask you both this important question:
Did first author Clara Calvert analyse the 500,000+ patient data sets for those Nature papers, verify them and write the papers - or were they ghost written for her?
@jsm2334 I have 3 new questions:
1⃣ why didn't you appear on the Razzaghi paper using your data?
2⃣ is your data synthetic?
3⃣ what is the binomial probability that 18/20 of a university's research team come from a group that comprises 2% of the US population, if all groups are equal?
@jsm2334 For those confused... The original thread on #OHDSI - the data curators claiming an impossible 96% efficacy rate for a type-mismatched vaccine against infection - is here.
Match to BGH [NM_180996.1]: (114/226bp)
CTGTGCCTTCTAGTTGCCAGCCATCTGTTGTTTGCCCCTCCCCCGTGCCTTCCTTGACCCTGGAAGGTGCCACTCCCACTGTCCTTTCCTAATAAAATGAGGAAATTGCATCGC
So there are 112 bp in the BGH PolyA cassette which are not in the BGH gene transcript, and presumably make that cassette as efficient as the SV40 PolyA as described in Goodwin 1992...
@DiedSuddenly_ @JesslovesMJK @Kevin_McKernan Also note the "ribbon" pictures after nearly two years have none of the diatheses seen in the other images. Totally clean. After 499 days. 🙄
Sorry but this is not a believable study.
1⃣ ORCID ID record for Lee is blank, she is not a molecular biologist (& address does not validate)
2⃣ No ethics approval despite clinical samples (blood and semen - seriously?)
3⃣ Vials were incubated for a year without bacterial or fungal growth - these people have never done cell culture.
4⃣Quoting #Sashagate as a source in scientific paper is a massive red flag
My view reading this is:
This paper was submitted to the IJVTPR to discredit it because it's one of the few journals that allows criticism of pharmaceutical companies.
I'm happy to reconsider if you can find a valid publication record for Young Mi Lee at that address.
@DiedSuddenly_ A bowling alley?
I can't find any record of "Hanna Gynecologist Clinic" using that provided address either.
@SenatorRennick @TonyNikolic10 @BroadbentMP This website was used as the central evidence for the government in Kassam vs Hazzard, the first and most important vaccine mandate case in the Commonwealth.
It has gone.
Therefore the ruling is obsolete.
@tonynikolic10 @AaronSiriSG @barnes_law archive.is/dEBZ1