4 ms·

IMHO, this [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24476300 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24476300] should be de-flagged.

• woodruffw 5y ago
  I think the first response to that other posting summarizes neatly why it should remain flagged while this one shouldn’t: > Given the extraordinary nature of the claims, the fact that this didn't see any peer review and isn't published in a real journal as well as the clear political motivations of the money behind the study […]
  • ttflee 5y ago
    To me, in this letter to editor, the same story was talked again as in the flagged PDF, in a more succinct writing style. I do not see why one is published and not flagged while the other one remains flagged.
    • bonzini 5y ago
      This one possibly should be flagged instead. See here about the codons of the cleavage site: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1391507230848032772.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1391507230848032772.html
    • woodruffw 5y ago
      This author has a PhD in chemical physics and has previously published peer-reviewed studies on SARS-CoV-2[1]. The ACS is also a reputable journal. The previous source was not written by a domain expert, was not published in a peer-reviewed journal, and had (as others have pointed out) obvious political conflicts of interest that made it fundamentally untrustworthy. [1]: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5102-4294 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5102-4294
• late2part 5y ago
  More than de-flagged, this should prompt a review of the culture and attitude that caused it to be flagged, and for that flag to stand. Also, Epstein did not kill himself; for an example of other unpopular assertions that are often censored.