Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Recently, Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca/University of Oxford announced with great fanfare that their candidate vaccines that target the Spike protein of SARS-COV-2 were ~92%, ~94% and 90% effective respectively. At around the same time, the N.F. Gamaleya Center For Epidemiology and Microbiology of the Russian Ministry of Health also announced that their candidate vaccine termed "Sputnik V" was also over 90 % effective. The response to the announcements of Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca/University of Oxford by the scientific community, so-called pundits and experts, including the influential Nature and Science Magazines, Government Officials and the Western Media at large was generally and resoundingly favorable and extremely enthusiastic while the response to announcement of the N.F. Gamaleya Center For Epidemiology and Microbiology of the Russian Ministry of Health was extremely reticent and derisive. The responses to the announcements of the above entities are not understandable because none provided any scientific data to support their un-scientific conclusions. It is not clear how the values of over 90% effectiveness of the candidate vaccines were arrive at. It is submitted that the announcements of Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna, AstraZeneca/University of Oxford and N.F. Gamaleya Center constitute Dishonest Scientific Reporting that are calculated to mislead. The limited results reported by Astra/Zeneca/University of Oxford also constitute Data Falsification
DPI-10000, Vaccines, Violation of Scientific Ethics, COVID-19, Effectiveness, SARS-COV-2, Pfizer/BioNTech, Data Falsification, Moderna, HPI-10000, IP-10000, DPP-10000, AstraZeneca/University of Oxford, Dishonest Scientific Reporting
DPI-10000, Vaccines, Violation of Scientific Ethics, COVID-19, Effectiveness, SARS-COV-2, Pfizer/BioNTech, Data Falsification, Moderna, HPI-10000, IP-10000, DPP-10000, AstraZeneca/University of Oxford, Dishonest Scientific Reporting
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 42 | |
| downloads | 5 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts