Addendum to “HCG Found in Tetanus Vaccine”: Examination of Alleged “Ethical Concerns” Based on False Claims by Certain of Our Critics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This updated addendum to “HCG Found in WHO Tetanus Vaccine in Kenya Raises Concern in the Developing World” (published October 28, 2017 by OALibJ) addresses arguments claiming to discredit it from John Broughall, a retired microbiologist, and from an unnamed person (or persons) going by the pseudonym “The Original Skeptical Raptor” (hereafter, “Raptor”). Our paper (Oller et al., 2017), hereinafter referred to as the “hCG-paper”, judging from the Web of Science and PubMed databases, was the first peer-reviewed scholarly work showing the scope of the WHO anti-fertility program focusing on “less developed countries” from 1972 to the present: (1) It examined official policy statements from the UN’s largest donor nation dating from 1975 about the perceived need for “far greater efforts at fertility control” especially in “less developed countries” (National Security Council, 1975, 2014). (2) It documented the stream of published research in that program directly or indirectly sponsored by the WHO. (3) It compared the stepped-up dosage schedule used by the WHO in the Kenya 2013-2015 vaccination campaign which was appropriate to their “birth-control” vaccine but radically different from any previously published schedule for ordinary tetanus vaccine. (4) It analyzed and documented the sources of laboratory data from accredited laboratories in Nairobi finding ?hCG in at least one-third of the samples of vaccine actually collected at the 2014 administration sites. (5) It revealed the convergence of all the foregoing sources of information supporting the charge of the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association leveled against the WHO (Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, 2014). In emails to OALibJ, Broughall claimed “ethical concerns” about the hCG-paper urging the publisher to retract it. Raptor said, “Open Access Library Journal . . . is a predatory journal” and the hCG-paper is a “pseudoscientific . . . outright lie” (The Original Skeptical Raptor, 2017).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.145 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.028 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".