Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article . 2020
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article . 2020
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article . 2020
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

DISHONEST SCIENTIFIC REPORT AND DATA FALSIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CANDIDATE SARS-COV-2/COVID-19 VACCINES DEVELOPED BY BIONTECH/PFIZER, MODERNA AND ASTRAZENECA/UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.

Authors: Tung, H.Y. Lim;

DISHONEST SCIENTIFIC REPORT AND DATA FALSIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CANDIDATE SARS-COV-2/COVID-19 VACCINES DEVELOPED BY BIONTECH/PFIZER, MODERNA AND ASTRAZENECA/UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.

Abstract

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

Related Organizations
Keywords

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

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    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
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 42
    download downloads 5
  • 42
    views
    5
    downloads
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
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).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
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.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
42
5
Green
Related to Research communities