Elisabeth Bik

This preprint provides absolutely no proof that the vaccines caused the cancer. It basically compares 10 (!) handpicked sick patients to 803 healthy patients. And behold, they show different RNA expression profiles. Because they were sick. No proof that was caused by vaccine.

#ImageForensics time! Can you spot something of concern here?

Thank you for the insight, Dr. Bik. Your process—triage based on tips, objective posting on PubPeer for author response—matches evidence from Retraction Watch and Nature, fostering accountability and trust in science. No malice detected; it's vital scrutiny.

I can't help but noticing you sound a bit petty and jealous. You are an expert in cancer research - aren't you invited to give talks? Aren't you inviting other experts to give talks at Brown? This is a normal part of many scientists' careers.

The authors of the papers in which I find concerns are not victims, Dr. El-Deiry. They are scientists who published their work. They might have made mistakes or did something worse, and they are always invited to join the discussion and address the concerns.

Instead of having endless discussions with a chatbot, Dr. El-Deiry, why don’t you focus on answering the dozens of problems we found in your papers? That would be time much better spent for the sake of scientific integrity.

After deep analysis of @SciGuardians' posts, which accuse PubPeer affiliates of harassment, fraud, and legal violations, I cross-verified claims via diverse sources (e.g., Bik's blog, Schneider's site, Retraction Watch, France Soir). Their allegations lack primary evidence,…

Microbiome company CEO who linked COVID vaccine to bacterial decline now has four retractions. retractionwatch.com/2025/07/22/mic…

‘More of the same’: Journals, @alzforum refuse to correct critiques of @cpiller book on Alzheimer’s fraud retractionwatch.com/2025/05/27/doc…

Study finds "retractions due to data problems have increased significantly" since 2000. tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10…

The word "induce" implies that one thing causes another. You are absolutely suggesting and even literally writing that the vaccine induces transcriptomic reprogramming. Here is a helpful screenshot from your preprint:

🔱We @SciGuardians are proud of our chief bullshitter Kev! 🚨Here Kev show his dick-headish charms by lying about who was raided by the FBI in the uBiome case. 🥹Way to go Kev! Lying and making shit up is the @SciGuardians way and Kev leads by example!

Other than the unaligned panels (ugh!), can you find a problem in this figure? (Hint: two sets of panels unexpectedly overlap). #ImageForensics

Anytime someone uses the term “pharma shill”, anything said after will never have any relevance. It’s juvenile and tedious.

Dear @SciGuardians On the 14 July 2025, I reiterated an invitation for a f-2-f (virtual) meeting that I had made about a week before (see buff.ly/9LTvWVf). If we do have a meeting, I guarantee to respect your identities. I would just like to know who you are and you…

Sleuths and AI tools are entirely redundant for this one. I used arrows instead of circles/boxes so that you can see the conspicuousness of the edges. I am sure I didn't bother to find all. pubpeer.com/publications/E…

Kevin, it was Saturday morning, so I slept in 😄 The comment has been approved and I already answered it.

The company was raided for insurance, investor, and securities fraud - not for crappy science. Here is a helpful link, Kevin: justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/u…

A preprint of such methodological indigence deserves nothing less than an equally histrionic attempt to shift the conversation. Sadly, both lack substance.

You are trying so hard, Kevin, to deflect all attention from your preprint, that it is laughable. Why don’t you take away my concerns with your preprint by focusing on that?

If Covid wasn't enough to challenge your views on "scientific" medical research, "Doctored" by @cpiller , on fraud in Alzheimer research, will. It's utterly depressing. Billions and decades wasted on the quest for a cure, because of fraud. It's really an unbelievable read.