This is a violation of COPE guidelines regarding academic publishing ethics and has been reported to his university.
The retraction process isn't something you weaponize as a revenge motive.
You much have a specific concern over a specific paper.
To publish a vendetta motive is clear violation of the system.
@RobertKennedyJr @DrJBhattacharya @MartyMakary @MartinKulldorff
The retraction process isn't something you weaponize as a revenge motive.
You much have a specific concern over a specific paper.
To publish a vendetta motive is clear violation of the system.
@RobertKennedyJr @DrJBhattacharya @MartyMakary @MartinKulldorff
@liu_universitet Is this in line with your code of conduct?
Looks like one university already ditched him.
The University has responded quickly.
I wonder if they are aware of Lonnis role in harassing the most cited microbiologist in the world (Didier) and Lonnis impact on the death of patients who lost access to HCQ based on his ideological inquisition?
I wonder if they are aware of Lonnis role in harassing the most cited microbiologist in the world (Didier) and Lonnis impact on the death of patients who lost access to HCQ based on his ideological inquisition?
Note PubPeer making ad hominem and associative fallacies regarding what groups I’ve interacted with in the past.
And they cite a factchecker with conflicted funding as a source.
So scientific.
And they cite a factchecker with conflicted funding as a source.
So scientific.
The Health Feedback factcheck is authored by this shill.
@BrokenTruthTV
brokentruth.com/flora-teoh-sho…
@BrokenTruthTV
brokentruth.com/flora-teoh-sho…
You would think after all the papers that have replicated the dsDNA contamination in the vaccines, that the trolls at PubPeer could pick up a pipette.
Instead, they use ad homs, factchecks, and associative fallacies.
Can Lonni actually point out a flaw or must he outsource this to factcheckers?
Instead, they use ad homs, factchecks, and associative fallacies.
Can Lonni actually point out a flaw or must he outsource this to factcheckers?
Lonni spends alot of time concerned about peer review.
Notice this papers of his was submitted, peer reviewed and published in 1 day.
Notice this papers of his was submitted, peer reviewed and published in 1 day.
This is highly unusual for that Journal
Here he mocks papers that are reviewed in 24 hours. Do as I say, not as I do.
AI platforms are not impressed with his soft social science. Does PubPeer have any complaints about less than 1 day peer review?
He mocked people who pointed out the Surgisphere fraud.
H/T @Arta_PlasmidDNA
This 1 day review paper argued for your reduced mobility during the pandemic.
Does his PubPeer cult have anything to say about this?
Does his PubPeer cult have anything to say about this?
If you need more toilet paper... this soft science paper is a good source. Its so soft its 5 ply.
academic.oup.com/jtm/article/29…
academic.oup.com/jtm/article/29…
Here Lonni argues for shutting down your schools.
Lots of publication bloat with editorials.
He can safely fire shots at real research while he bloats his embarrassing citation rate with fluff editorials that usually safe from retraction because they are just woke opinions.
Lots of publication bloat with editorials.
He can safely fire shots at real research while he bloats his embarrassing citation rate with fluff editorials that usually safe from retraction because they are just woke opinions.
As Lonni cries some more about it only being an Editorial.
He commonly publishes with Health Nerd.
Also known as BeijingGideon.
Also known as BeijingGideon.
https://twitter.com/Jikkyleaks/status/1528678161818734597
And his sacred PubPeer and Retraction watch are conflicted Pharma trolls.
https://twitter.com/VBaudoux/status/1809463359072301435
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
