• Commodore64__

Opinion: The Twitter Spanish Inquisition Against SAVA

Summary of FUD: The Twitter Twits that Tweet Tortured Truths (T7) Think SAVA is Lying (again) About the Original, Uncropped Western Blots

RESPONSE


If you want the TLDR skip to timeline graphic near the end, but trust me you will want to read this all to see how absolutely frenzied the "Twitter Scientists" get in their echo chamber of FUD.

"Something is rotten in the state of Denmark” is often quoted from Shakespeare's play Hamlet to describe when there is something incredibly wrong going on. There is something rotten going on, but it's not inside SAVA, it is on Twitter. The Twitter Twits that Tweet Tortured Truths (T7) have reached a new level of conspiratorial alarm yesterday in their online echo chamber devoid of reason. They are ever learning about SAVA, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth about SAVA. I believe and feel the integrity of both SAVA and the Journal of Neuroscience (JN) have actually been questioned by T7 after this press release from SAVA. What did the "offending" press release say that did not fit in their narrative of FUD? With permission from the JN, SAVA shared this written statement:

The Journal of Neuroscience follows COPE [Committee on Publication Ethics] guidelines and takes any claims of misconduct very seriously. In response to allegations of data manipulation in JNeurosci 2012;32:9773-9784 the Journal requested raw data, including images of original, uncropped Western blots. The Journal determined that there was one duplicated panel in Figure 8 and a Corrigendum was requested and will be printed. No evidence of data manipulation was found for Western blot data.”

So what important things did we learn from this statement? I am going to painfully state out the obvious so even a member of the T7 can understand the series of events:

  1. Journalistic integrity is a serious matter for the JN.

  2. JN follows and maintains the high standards of publication ethics set by the COPE Guidelines.

  3. Because of this, as a matter of standard practice related to maintaining journalistic integrity, JN contacted SAVA first to address the allegation of data manipulation alleged by the Citizen's Petition (CP) issued in August 2021.

  4. JN then asked SAVA for raw data, including images of original, uncropped Western blots, which the CP alleged were digitally manipulated. (Members of the T7 with and without publicly admitted short positions in SAVA, also agreed there were signs of digital manipulation).

  5. SAVA then sent the raw data (which included the images of original, uncropped Western Blots) to JN. I want to be abundantly clear before I proceed, that the quote from JN makes it obvious that raw data is not just numeric in nature, but includes images as well.

  6. After reviewing the raw data -which includes images of the original, uncropped Western blots- the JN found a minor mistake (yes these happen and it's nothing to worry about), but most importantly that NO EVIDENCE OF MANIPULATION FOR WESTERN BLOT DATA WAS FOUND

Before I proceed, I want to explain a simple concept known as chain of custody. As I have mentioned before, I work for a law enforcement agency. The concept of chain of custody is that there is a documented process of everyone who is involved in how evidence is discovered, handled, and stored. This is how you maintain integrity in a criminal case, so that evidence is not questioned in a court of law . There is a 62 day gap of knowledge in the public forum of the chain of custody relating to the original, uncropped images of the Western blots. Where reasonable people would find a simple and logical explanation, the T7s show a frenzied collective mind that makes logic leaps and determines there is lying going on, Evidence 1: An e-mail from JN saying that Cassava "sent us the blots". This can be construed to mean that SAVA actually sent the images to JN. We can likely assume it does not mean that SAVA coordinated the delivery of the requested raw data (including the images) be sent by Dr. Wang directly to JN.

Evidence 2: JN contacted Dr. Wang and they were referred to a Coauthor. The Co-author in question is without a doubt Dr. Lindsay Burns. Well, what's the problem? The problem that T7 asserts is that somebody is lying. On the surface (see Evidence 3 below) this assertion looks convincing, but I will explain why there's no smoking gun here. Evidence 3

But here's the AHA moment, evidence 3 from T7 only shows you part of the statement. Here is the rest and it is important in our quest to determine what actually happened:

One way to settle the discourse around Western blots might be to go back to the original films and images. As a reminder, Cassava Sciences does not have its own laboratory facilities. We use other people’s labs. For this reason, we don’t have the original films or images for the Western blots in question. Those were generated by our science collaborator at CUNY, who is Prof. Wang. For this reason, I have respectfully requested that CUNY inquire thoroughly but expeditiously into the allegations targeting Prof. Wang. I have also asked CUNY that its conclusionary findings be made available to the public.

Again, T7 says that somebody is lying. Here are screenshots from T7 insinuating they have found a smoking gun of a liar:









There's no smoking gun here. SAVA and the JN are not lying. No fake evidence was sent to JN. T7 has incredibly bad logic here. Logically, sometime after September 3, 2021 SAVA acquired the raw data, including the original, uncropped images from Dr. Wang/CUNY and then sent them to the JN. It's just that simple. There's no need to submit fake evidence to the Journal of Neuroscience (which SAVA absolutely did not do) and they did not lie for months about not having the blots. Let me clear in my language so T7 van understand, I repeat again SAVA did not have the original, uncropped images of the Western blots before September 3, 2021. They logically must have acquired the original uncropped images of the Western blots sometime after September 3, 2021. It seems like the T7 sees conspiracy everywhere or at the very least overcomplicates reality with the most farcical of logic leaps. Khaby Lame disapproves of T7's frenzied logic that overcomplicates things and insinuates THE JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE is incompetent (see previous image referring to the wallet). I am not a lawyer, but that sounds like libel against the good name of the THE JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE. I certainly feel like libel may have been committed against SAVA as well when T7 says either SAVA lied or submitted faked evidence to JN. T7 should not publicly denounce the good name of SAVA based on speculation and bad logic. The simplest explanation is usually the most likely. See the timeline below with its SIMPLE and REASONABLE explanations that detail what likely and logically happened in the 62 day gap of public knowledge of the chain of custody:

A SIMPLE TIME LINE WITH REASONABLE LOGIC




T7: Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition


Like this classic scene from Monty Python, T7 jumps onto Twitter and shouts "Aha! We have you now", but their explanation is the most complicated, most conspiratorial, most unreasonable explanation there could possibly be. Do you think T7 is objectively living up to the logical and research standards demanded by the level of education they claim on Twitter? I don't think so. I think this post shows how logic has been abandoned by T7. Do you think T7 is motivated to make absurd leaps of logic to satisfy their egos? Do you think they are motivated to smear the Journal of Neuroscience because their findings did not support their wild theories about SAVA that are daily being dismantled with logic and evidence? I think so and it is alarming to me that people that claim they believe in science would smear a journal of science by insinuating, at the very least, that the Journal of Neuroscience is incompetent. It would be terribly embarrassing for them to stop now. Perhaps they feel they are too far in. Perhaps they feel like they are past the point of no return. Do you think the members of T7 with publicly stated short positions are financially motivated to spread this illogical and unreasonable FUD? T7, once again you have found no smoking gun on SAVA, because there isn't one. But in your attempts to do so, you are cementing your reputation as the Spanish Inquisitors of Twitter who employ diverse elements such as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency for FUD, and an almost fanatical devotion to spreading it daily.



980 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All