As the International Research Integrity Conference (November 16-18, 2025) takes place in Sydney, a new twist has dealt a major blow to the scientific integrity scandal. ScienceGuardians™, the organization dedicated to promoting transparency and rigor in research, published a damning investigation yesterday that confirms and amplifies the suspicions raised in previous articles by France-Soir . Simultaneously, ScienceGuardians™ sent an urgent email this morning to the organizers, speakers, and institutions involved. France-Soir obtained a copy of this message, which highlights the risks of ethical contamination at the very heart of the event. This alert, sent at 6:35 a.m. local time, coincides with the last day of the conference and amplifies the revelations of a 9-minute video broadcast the previous day on X. Rich in irrefutable evidence, this video bluntly exposes the censorship mechanisms used on PubPeer against criticism of Elisabeth Bik and her colleagues. This case highlights a blatant hypocrisy: that of an “integrity consultant” who tracks down the frauds of others while fiercely protecting her own, thus revealing practices of censorship and defamation orchestrated around Elisabeth Bik.
Background: From controversy to comprehensive investigation
As we detailed in previous articles (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6) on France-Soir , Elisabeth Bik is at the center of a storm. Praised by some for contributing over 10,000 comments on PubPeer—a post-publication review platform—she faces accusations of bias, harassment, and manipulation. Figures such as Professor Didier Raoult have publicly accused her of coordinated defamation efforts, even invoking the Hertel case law of the European Court of Human Rights on freedom of scientific expression.
The ScienceGuardians™ investigation, launched in late 2024, tested PubPeer’s impartiality by applying to Bik the rigorous review standards it imposes on others.
Details of the investigation: methodology and relentless execution
The investigation, commissioned by ScienceGuardians™ in November 2024, mobilized a panel of independent and highly respected experts in their respective fields. These scientists, who remained anonymous to protect their integrity, were tasked with a clear and objective mission: to conduct a comprehensive post-publication review of articles co-authored by Elisabeth Bik, focusing on potential serious scientific flaws —such as methodological errors, data manipulation, or conflicts of interest—or ethical issues, such as a lack of transparency or bias in the analysis. The evaluation criteria were strict: to identify only “fatal flaws” justifying retraction, based on irrefutable evidence, such as inconsistencies in figures, non-reproducible data, or misleading statements.
The ultimate goal was transparent publication: documenting each finding on PubPeer with detailed comments, screenshots, and precise references (DOIs of the relevant articles). Between November 19, 2024, and January 30, 2025, the experts reviewed a series of articles published by Bik and his collaborators. The result: 17 papers were identified as containing concerns at the retraction level. For each, a critical commentary was submitted on PubPeer, supported by visual and analytical evidence.
The damning results: 100% censorship
What was intended to be an exercise in transparency turned into a blatant display of bias. According to documentation provided by ScienceGuardians™, each of the 17 comments was instantly censored on PubPeer, without exception.
Starting on November 19, 2024, the first comment on an article co-authored by Bik (DOI not specified in the video but listed in the appendices) was submitted at 2:32 PM GMT and disappeared in less than 5 minutes. This pattern repeated itself daily: submissions on November 20, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29; December 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9, 2024; and finally, January 30, 2025. Each time, the comments— rich in technical analysis and evidence —were deleted without notification or public justification. The exception that proves the rule is a single comment, submitted on November 23, 2024, on a key paper (potentially related to image analysis in microbiology), which “escaped” the initial censorship. Visible for exactly 10 days, it was deleted on December 3, 2024 at 09:15 GMT, coinciding with a suspicious connection from an IP associated with PubPeer moderators.
The video, released yesterday, compiles these sequences in real time: it shows the PubPeer interfaces before and after submission, “comment deleted” notifications, and overlays of “FRAUD” on the profiles involved. Although the exact DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers) of the 17 papers are not exhaustively listed in the video (for readability reasons), they include work published in journals such as Cell, Nature, and Science, covering topics like fraud detection in imaging and genomic analysis. ScienceGuardians™ will publish a full appendix with hyperlinks for independent verification.
This systematic censorship is not a simple mistake : it reveals a deception orchestrated to protect Bik and his mafia inner circle – a network of allies accused of coordinating attacks against dissident researchers.
Early morning escalation: an alert email to the Sydney conference
As participants at the conference—hosted by the University of Sydney—debate the virtues of integrity, ScienceGuardians™ has struck hard. An email, signed Elias Verum on behalf of the organization, is addressed to the organizers (including Jennifer Byrne of the University of Sydney and Simon Gandevia of NeuRA), key speakers (such as David Vaux of WEHI, Jason Chin of ANU, and Lisa Bero of the University of Colorado), and directly to Elisabeth Bik. It also targets the alleged media sponsor, Retraction Watch (via Ivan Oransky), and other figures like Ben Mol of Monash University and Eugenie Reich.
Here are key excerpts from the message, which France-Soir was able to consult:
“Over the past year, ScienceGuardians™’s legal and investigative team commissioned a thorough, independent investigation from a scientific consortium, which uncovered compelling evidence that several individuals scheduled to speak at the International Conference on Research Integrity (November 16-18, 2025, Sydney, Australia) — as well as the event’s designated media sponsor — have engaged in activities fundamentally inconsistent with the research integrity principles they claim to publicly uphold. ”
The tone is professional yet incisive: ScienceGuardians™ denounces a “coordinated network of denigration and defamation” operating under the guise of integrity, with Bik as a leading “scientific integrity consultant” implicated in activities of deception and fraudulent manipulation. The email refers to yesterday’s video, already viral on X, and warns of “reputational risks” and “ethical vulnerabilities” for institutions, including the University of Sydney (copied to its vice-chancellor and ethics committees). Copied to 26 people, from identified suspects to university leaders, the email does not call for immediate retractions but urges heightened vigilance, emphasizing that “unwitting complicity can also create ethical vulnerabilities.”
This intervention, right at the heart of the conference, transforms the event into a textbook case: how to promote integrity when its champions are the first suspects?
Reactions: massive support and critical analysis on social media
The revelations quickly ignited social media, with strong reactions from key figures in the dissident scientific community.
Dr. Lynn Fynn-Derella, a physician and commentator known for her analyses of the pandemic management, published an exhaustive thread (1 and 2) deconstructing the role of Elisabeth Bik.
What We See in Her Post
→ An apparent “precision note”: she reminds Didier Raoult that he ranks on the list of researchers with the most retractions.
→ But this ironic tone, paired with a Retraction Watch link, has nothing scientific about it: it’s an act of aggressive…— Dr. Lynn Fynn-derella🐭 (@Fynnderella1) November 17, 2025
Fynn-Derella describes Bik as a self-proclaimed “reputation blogger”, far from an active researcher, who operates as a “narrative coercion tool” under the guise of science. Fynn-Derella points to Bik’s past at uBiome—a fraudulent biotech company convicted in 2019 for manipulating biological data—its opaque funding from foundations like the Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust, and its “technically fragile” methods: subjective visual detection of duplicated images, without validated protocols or objective thresholds, often ignoring the scientific context. “Bik is not an independent scientist; she is the architect of an intellectual intimidation infrastructure”, she concludes, highlighting the ideological bias against researchers critical of the Covid consensus, and the harassment complaints from France (Professor Didier Raoult’s IHU) and elsewhere. This thread amplifies the call for reform of scientific fact-checkers.
Professor Didier Raoult, for his part, reacted enthusiastically, calling the revelations “the unmasking of the cheaters”: “We are the good guys! The most famous scientists are being harassed by an organization, PubPeer, with its obscure workings, whose supposed inspiring scientist is Ms. Bik, a crazy woman who reads the images in articles from the stars.”
He praises ScienceGuardians as a “counter-power” of “real scientists” who are dismantling a “corrupt system” involving Nature (which awarded Bik a prize funded by Melinda Gates). Raoult mocks this “world” where cheaters become moral arbiters, flirting with “conspiracy theories” in the face of so much hypocrisy.
Les tricheurs sont démasqués !
On est les gentils !
Les scientifiques les plus célèbres sont harcelés par une officine, Pubpeer au fonctionnement obscur, dont la prétendue scientifique inspiratrice est Mme Bik, une folle qui lit les images des articles dans les étoiles.… https://t.co/1tJ2ISbeqE— Didier Raoult (@raoult_didier) November 18, 2025
The devastating consequences for internationally renowned researchers
These practices of censorship and defamation have not been without victims: world-renowned researchers such as Professors Didier Raoult and Wafik El-Deiry, and 2013 Nobel laureate in Medicine Thomas Südhof, have paid a heavy price. Raoult, a pioneer in infectious diseases and director of the IHU Méditerranée Infection, saw his career besieged by coordinated campaigns on PubPeer, leading to controversial retractions of publications on hydroxychloroquine and complaints of harassment —despite saving thousands of lives during the pandemic. Wafik El-Deiry, an Egyptian-American oncologist and director of the Fox Chase Cancer Center, faced a wave of accusations of “image manipulation” in 2020–2021, resulting in more than 20 forced retractions and institutional withdrawal, destroying his credibility without a thorough investigation. Professor Thomas Südhof, winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize in Medicine (Stanford), had more than fifty of his articles flagged on PubPeer by Elisabeth Bik and her allies between 2020 and 2024. Most of the anomalies were minor (misplaced blot labels, similar image backgrounds), but the media pressure led to a cascade of retractions and public humiliation. His laboratory had to create an entire webpage to defend itself, explaining that these “errors” were unintentional and had no scientific impact.
These cases reveal a consistent pattern: a report on Pubpeer followed by media amplification by Retraction Watch , leading to retractions or ostracism, even when the errors are minor or debatable. This results in the symbolic destruction of reputations, transforming science into an ideological battleground where dissenters pay the price for daring to challenge the consensus.
Implications: a call for comprehensive and immediate reform
These revelations are a real wake-up call. PubPeer is emerging as a biased tool, and Bik’s network as an ecosystem of selective power. From a scientific perspective, this calls for independent audits and anti-censorship guidelines for PubPeer. For the public, this affair exacerbates the erosion of trust in scientific and medical institutions, as evidenced by the Pradelle-Lega study scandal.
This study presented a flawed model that fabricated 17,000 deaths linked to hydroxychloroquine. It was retracted in August 2024 without sanctions against the authors (Alexiane Pradelle, Jean-Christophe Lega, et al.) or their media promoters, such as Professor Matthieu Molimard, who was paradoxically tasked with investigating disinformation. Matthieu Molimard is close to Bik, having met with her in Bordeaux.
The universities of Lyon and Bordeaux, the respective parent institutions of Lega and Molimard, contacted by France-Soir, have opted for silence or official protection! Action is imperative: retraction of the 17 offending papers and potential legal complaints for academic obstruction. The world turned upside down.
Science facing its mirror
With this investigation and timely email, ScienceGuardians™ is no longer just denouncing ; it’s taking action to purge hypocrisy. The “queen of PubSmear” and her network are seeing their grip challenged in real time, before the eyes of a conference dedicated to… integrity. Who was pulling the strings? The answers will emerge from the reforms to come. Transparency is non-negotiable: it’s the foundation of science.
Watch a video summary of this article :