Critical Review of Achs et al. (2025) on Residual DNA in mRNA Vaccine Preparations

Another Preprint on Nostr/Bitcoin.

I was asked to clean up my review of Achs et al.

Battles in Slovakia

1)Dr. Johnathan Gilthorpe and ChatGPT5.o helped me condense the thread into something more professional.

2)I placed the Preprint on Zenodo.

3)I then asked ChatGPT to convert that PDF into a one long PNG file.

4)I posted that PNG on Nostr with the Primal App.

5)I downloaded the Nostr PNG to get the Shasum -a 256 hash of the Nostr PNG file. This is important as Nostr/Primal compresses the image a bit and changes its hash. Anyone downloading this image should get the same hash seen below or the file has been altered.

shasum -a 256 = 1f6ff789c7787b9d639f977b6c013523d9158ae5187370d37af54b9319a619ce

6)We then want to record the hash on an immutable distributed ledger like Bitcoin as a tamper evidence tool.

If anyone downloads the image and manipulates it with AI and recirculates it, the Hash wont match what is on Bitcoin. So the Primal Link plus its hash is now immutable and if anyone tries to circulate manipulated images of the PNG file, there will be a hash on BTC that can out them.

It might be adequate to rely solely on Nostr for this but it hasn’t been around as long as Bitcoin and Bitcoin has the highest energy budget of any blockchain today and is considered the gold standard for security. Its just not ideal for large data.

This is how the OP_RETURN should look in BTC.

Critical Review of Achs

et al. (2025) on Residual DNA in mRNA Vaccine Preparations

Kevin McKernan

https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqsr96glwf7mm33lhyvdczdce79xnxt5gw9dcpa973370jxfzmyekkqt7r5ss

1f6ff789c7787b9d639f977b6c013523d9158ae5187370d37af54b9319a619ce

Voila!

Mempool transaction

So we now have the Critical Review of Achs et al (2025) on Residual DNA in MRNA Vaccine Preparations, Kevin McKernan + Primal Link + Hash inscribed into Bitcoin for eternity.

WHY?

This “Hash and Stash” is critical as the scoundrels at PubSmear have been caught doing exactly this. They take images from someones papers, they alter them to make them look manipulated, complain to the journal and the authors often don’t even realize this before the Journal retracts the paper.

Most of these Journals will give you a 1 week ultimatum to defend yourself and for many experts or physicians they can’t just clear their calendars, or ignore their patients to counter to the low citation tantrum talismans at PubSmear. So the attacks cost nothing to produce from Anon trolls but have overwhelming influence by editors afraid of this mob. Follow ScienceGuardians if you want an expose’ on many of their tactics.

Here are some receipts that PubSmear engages in image manipulation to con journals into retracting papers.

This is a paper they attacked from Dr. Marth at Stanford. Original image in the paper below.

PubSmears modified image.

If you run these images through an image alignment tool they will not agree pixel to pixel. PubSmear never writes up their methods for peer review. This shady practice of theirs is well documented here.

Often times the researches don’t have access to the original files from decades ago to fight these accusations under the coerced timelines offered by the Journal and the papers get retracted.

Here is an example of one such ultimatum given to a very busy physician. Do they choose to cancel patient appointments and deal with the PubSmear Mob over a paper they already paid $3-$5K to be reviewed? Retraction never offers a refund nor returns your copyright. The Authors have to disclose their conflicts but the attack mob is free of this!

Once you realize many of the editors at the journals are also contributors to PubSmear, you see this for what it is: A gatekeeping operation where the journals can take the cash of the researchers and retract their work through what appears to be second parties after they have cashed in. This is far more effective as the journal washes their hands of the rejection. They leverage free labor for the review and the retractions do much more damage to the dissidents than a simple confidential desk rejection. Take the cash and “always F$ck them at the drive through”.

This is why it is imperative that we disintermediate the Journals. To do so we must have immutable cryptographic hashes of the original work. If they can not prove they are working with the initial published image with a hash, then they should be ignored.

The “Hash and Stash” is just step one of getting your paper out there on immutable ledgers (Nostr/Bitcoin).

The next stage of Peer Review is to recruit Reviewers and I believe the only way this will ever function correctly is if we have transparent bounties. No market can function correctly without price signals (think Uber). Prices convey important information about urgency and scarcity. Supply and demand cannot be satisfied with communistic ideologies of everyone chipping in for free while the Journals collect all the cash for Article processing fees and Pharma advertisement and subscription agreements.

There is already money in peer review; it’s just that none of it actually goes to the people ensuring quality (the reviewers). The journals offer nothing today. Anyone can make a PDF and post it on more robust servers than theirs. You don’t need to hand over your copyright in the new world and you dont need a 3rd party hired by Pharma to judge your work.

Bitcoin Fixes This!