PubSmear fabricates data in effort to retract DNA contam paper

Claims ChatGPT ate their homework

One of the best accounts on X is VaccineMole. They dug up this gem of an interaction with “Investor” Kevin Patrick of PubSmear. As many know by now, the retraction mob at PubSmear has been targeting the Speicher et al paper and succeeded in getting a notice of investigation placed on it at the Journal. The Journal has confided in us that their concerns came from PubSmear. But when you examine the PubSmear criticisms, they turn out to be complete fabrications.

What does Kevin Patrick have to say about his tortious interference with our contract at Autoimmunity?

Ooops.. Yes, I made it up but its ChatGPTs fault!

(paraphrasing).

This is the guy that had an aneurism over a WHO typo in the paper:)

Even Iron Man can’t Irony that hard!

Yes, PubSmear was critiquing the proper use of the Klinman citation while failing to cite their use of ChatGPT.

“I don’t like how you interpreted that Klinman paper so Im going to completely fabricate what that paper actually said in the name of academic purity” (paraphrasing).

Huh?

Plagiarism is fine, only when you’re bagged in a lie and how many times have we seen PubSmear attack the use of AI generated paper mills?

AI for me but not for thee!

He must know that written falsehoods like this are libel and confessing to it only harms his defense?

Given the evidence of PubSmear members’ vitriolic targeting of scientists papers before they have even read them, this is of little surprise.

And their Retraction for Hire emails add additional fuel to the fire.

But there is more than just this one Kevin Patrick error.

A 2nd one exists on PubSmear where he attempts to claim we cited the wrong Moderna patent.

See for yourself

Here is the Moderna parent we cite.

Here is the text in that patent

He goes on to cite another Moderna patent which reinforces this same issue.

Bit of an own goal but thanks for proving our point. If the journal wants us to add this citation to strengthen the point, we will happily comply.

The communications have been forwarded to my counsel and we will see where they go with this.

Grok doesn’t think his chances are very good.

RetractionWatch parroted Kevin Patricks work in their article about our paper. If you are waiting for RetractionWatch to retract their own work, don’t hold your breath. They are funded by the same people and are unlikely to turn on their insiders.

In other news ScienceGuardians has documented that Taylor and Francis (the owners of Autoimmunity) have a PubSmear insider in their Research Integrity department tasked with investigating our paper (Nick Wise). In a case that has the eyes of the ACIP committee, the head of HHS, NIH and the FDA including Senator Ron Johnsons concerns over corruption in science, I smell a RICO case in the works.

In other news, ScienceGuardians also discovers that PubSmear member Leonid Schneider fabricated his research thesis.

I guess it was so boring none of his academic advisors realized he embedded this image as a scientific description of his plasmid. Ooops.

Shortly after the PubSmear mob attacked our paper on the Saturday it came out, RFKjr declares war on the journal cartel with the assistance of the DOJ.

So the PubSmear games continue and now the heads of the scientific institutions in the US have their eye on how Taylor and Francis will handle this case. Will they recuse members of their investigation team that have ties to PubSmear? Will they demand the same conflict of interest checks on their semi-anonymous tantrum team? Will their critiques be taken on face value or tortured with the same scrutiny as the peer review process?

I would once again advocate for putting the peer review public as most of the PubSmear complaints are redundant to the critiques traversed in Peer Review.

You can find our replies to their concerns on our substacks (see Jessica Rose and Courageous Truth). We will not be engaging on their platform as I have been censored from it before and the moderators are biased.

Arnold Foundation funded RetractionWatch Parrots an "Investor"

Stay tuned for my next post. Ive performed deeper Nanopore sequencing on the vaccines and 6574 base pair fragments from E.coli are now being found. This is long enough to suggest full length plasmid must exist in some vials. We will not detect them with Nanopore sequencers as only linear DNA can be sequenced with that system. Circular DNA will not enter the pores.

3.9Kb plasmid reads are also being found.