Daniel Eicher isn't even a real scientist

Jones is innocent you fucking goof, we studied the data



nguc1v.png
 
LOL
TS making this thread like he's actually onto something. Even if he was entirely correct (pretty doubtful), it means jack shit.
 
Dr. Eichner has extensive anti-doping experience and was previously the Science Director at the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA). At USADA, he provided scientific support for USADA’s programs in research, intelligence, sample collection planning, results management, arbitration and education. Prior to joining USADA, Dr. Eichner was the Chief Scientific Officer for the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA). During his time at ASADA, he was a member of the Anti-Doping Research Program, Anti-Doping Ethical Review Board and an expert witness for numerous Australian Customs Investigations relating to steroid and performance-enhancing seizures. He received his B.S. from the Australian National University (ANU) with first class honors and later completed his Ph.D. in medical science from the ANU.
Click to expand...

You are totally more qualified to discuss the topic than the fraudster above.
 
-Dim- said:
His BS and PhD came from the Australian National University which is their national research Uni.

Ive no idea about his thesis, but the fact you say he has no published research papers when he has over 20 leads me to suspect you might be wrong about that as well.
Click to expand...

This guy's a figure head getting his name on papers while working at a private institution. Publications in small impact factor papers can essentially be bought & paid for.

Impact factor:
3.5 -- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-012-6626-y
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1791
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1986
2.3 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rcm.6678
2.7 -- https://www.future-science.com/doi/abs/10.4155/bio.14.109
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

He's got ONE decent paper in Analytical Chemistry from what I can see: 6.7 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

And to be honest, it looks likes Holly D. Cox is doing most the work and likely the writing. Eichner provides the funding and that's it. Holly D. Cox is the real scientist.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
So I finally got around to doing some research. I'm more of a "scientist" than "Dr." Eichner is. The guy has no peer reviewed publications. Anyone that knows anything about the scientific community would know that peer reviewed publications measure the worth of a scientist. Myself I have one peer reviewed, first author publication in Dev Cell. I'm working on my 2nd now.

Eichner has ZERO peer reviewed publications. His thesis supervisor didn't even put his name on his thesis. The guy was an orphan PhD student failure that was granted a mercy PhD. Many institutions will fail students, refusing to grant a PhD without first author, peer reviewed publications.

Basically, Eichner has a Mc PhD.

Edit: This is the guy that runs the SMRTL facility and is the "expert" that Dana White keeps citing, who determined Jones "did not re-ingest" Turinabol.

https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=DA+eichner+dendritic+cells+immune+ANU&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_ylo=1995&as_yhi=2007
Click to expand...
I'm not surprised. USADA has been sketchy for a while and they seem to have an ongoing feud with WADA

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/01/sport/wada-white-house-summit-craig-reedie-spt-intl/index.html
 
kflo said:
Lol
Click to expand...
This guy's a figure head getting his name on papers while working at a private institution. Publications in small impact factor papers can essentially be bought & paid for.

Impact factor:
3.5 -- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-012-6626-y
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1791
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1986
2.3 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rcm.6678
2.7 -- https://www.future-science.com/doi/abs/10.4155/bio.14.109
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

He's got ONE decent paper in Analytical Chemistry from what I can see: 6.7 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

And to be honest, it looks likes Holly D. Cox is doing most the work and likely the writing. Eichner provides the funding and that's it. Holly D. Cox is the real scientist.
 
-Dim- said:
yes he does.

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/2040247808_Daniel_Eichner

22 publications on researchgate alone.



seriously dude, if you are gonna go down that road, at least get your facts correct
Click to expand...
He's got his name on papers being the head of SMRTL* and providing funding to research.

Plus, 90% of his lead-author publications are in garbage tier journals that no respectable Principle Investigator would ever allow their students to publish in.

And the vast majority of his work seems to be done by Holly D. Cox, who is likely the real scientist between the two.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
This guy's a figure head getting his name on papers while working at a private institution. Publications in small impact factor papers can essentially be bought & paid for.

Impact factor:
3.5 -- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-012-6626-y
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1791
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1986
2.3 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rcm.6678
2.7 -- https://www.future-science.com/doi/abs/10.4155/bio.14.109
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

He's got ONE decent paper in Analytical Chemistry from what I can see: 6.7 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

And to be honest, it looks likes Holly D. Cox is doing most the work and likely the writing. Eichner provides the funding and that's it. Holly D. Cox is the real scientist.
Click to expand...
he's a leader in the field for a long time, and you're questioning his credentials relative to your own. it's embarrassing.

but the real issue is you made this thread without checking your facts. again.
 
kflo said:
he's a leader in the field for a long time, and you're questioning his credentials relative to your own. it's embarrassing.

but the real issue is you made this thread without checking your facts. again.
Click to expand...
LOL. A "leader in the field". My ass. This guy's putting out garbage low impact publications in high volume -- a typical bottom feeder "PI".

Just wait until Holly Cox moves on from him and he needs to replace her. I've seen PIs drop to their knees and beg people like Holly not to leave them.

Believe what you will. This guy is a businessman, providing funding to smart people and putting his name on their research. That's it. Sadly that's how academia operates. Whoever provides your funding for you is automatically the lead author on your research. Even if you came up with the ideas 100% yourself and wrote the paper 100% yourself, they still legally own your research. The intellectual property always belongs to the person providing the funding/grant.

Maybe you should learn a thing or two about academia before making assumptions.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
LOL. A "leader in the field". My ass. This guy's putting out garbage low impact publications in high volume -- a typical bottom feeder "PI".

Just wait until Holly Cox moves on from him and he needs to replace her. I've seen PIs drop to their knees and beg people like Holly not to leave them.

Believe what you will.
Click to expand...
hahahaha. omg this is embarrassing.

hey, maybe holly cox helped write his statement. how bout dat..
 
Only Here for Attachments said:
<45>

/thread
Click to expand...
Not really. You have to discount any paper in less than impact factor ~5 journals, which can literally be bought and paid for.

That eliminates 90% of his "publications". Also, Holly D. Cox seems to be doing all of his work. He's likely just providing the funding and some general feedback, but he owns all of her intellectual property by providing said funding.
 
kflo said:
hahahaha. omg this is embarrassing.

hey, maybe holly cox helped write his statement. how bout dat..
Click to expand...
I doubt it. At this point you're just trolling again. You obviously didn't even know what the term "Impact Factor" meant before today. You probably googled it in the last hour.

That alone allows me to completely discount your irrelevant posts.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
Not really. You have to discount any paper in less than impact factor ~5 journals, which can literally be bought and paid for.

That eliminates 90% of his "publications". Also, Holly D. Cox seems to be doing all of his work. He's likely just providing the funding and some general feedback, but he owns all of her intellectual property by providing said funding.
Click to expand...

Are you @snackgod with this repeating the same thing in every reply?
 
Alpha_T83 said:
This guy's a figure head getting his name on papers while working at a private institution. Publications in small impact factor papers can essentially be bought & paid for.

Impact factor:
3.5 -- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-012-6626-y
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1791
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1986
2.3 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rcm.6678
2.7 -- https://www.future-science.com/doi/abs/10.4155/bio.14.109
2.5 -- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

He's got ONE decent paper in Analytical Chemistry from what I can see: 6.7 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dta.1715

And to be honest, it looks likes Holly D. Cox is doing most the work and likely the writing. Eichner provides the funding and that's it. Holly D. Cox is the real scientist.
Click to expand...

you said he had ZERO published peer reviewed papers

he has more than twenty on researchgate alone

You know full well that papers are almost never authored by a single person but by whole lab teams

stop now.
 
-Dim- said:
you said he had ZERO published peer reviewed papers

he has more than twenty on researchgate alone

You know full well that papers are almost never authored by a single person but by whole lab teams

stop now.
Click to expand...

LOL. The definition of truly peer reviewed paper is one which you do not pay to publish your work (unless there is an added option to pay for open access, which you can decline), and your manuscript is independently reviewed by leading scientists in your field. 90% of Eichner's "lead author publications" are eliminated because they are in garbage tier journals.

Journals like PLoS ONE are "peer reviewed", but you pay them to publish your work, and manuscripts sent to PLoS ONE are almost never reviewed by independent scientists who are leaders in your field.

This isn't theoretical math or physics where top-tier journals can have low impact factors. This is the biological sciences.

A post-doc friend of mine runs an impact factor ~2 journal. They make sure to circularly cite their own work, to raise the impact factor from 0. People PAY HIM to publish their work. And his papers are "peer reviewed" in the sense that he shops out reviews to PhD and post doc trainees. But they don't fit the true scientific definition of a peer reviewed paper.

I'm really surprsied. I thought you were an academic but clearly you're not. If you were, you would immediately understand what I was talking about.

However, that Analytical Chemistry is a decent publication, so I was wrong about zero. I took a look at 5 of them and saw all garbage "bought-and-paid for" publications.
 
Last edited:
Alpha_T83 said:
So I finally got around to doing some research. I'm more of a "scientist" than "Dr." Eichner is. The guy has no peer reviewed publications from his PhD. Anyone that knows anything about the scientific community would know that peer reviewed publications measure the worth of a scientist. Myself I have one peer reviewed, first author publication in Dev Cell. I'm working on my 2nd now.

Eichner has one* decent peer reviewed publication recently, but thesis supervisor didn't even put his name on his thesis. The guy was an orphan PhD student failure that was granted a mercy PhD. Many institutions will fail students, refusing to grant a PhD without first author, peer reviewed publications.

Basically, Eichner has a Mc PhD.

Edit: This is the guy that runs the SMRTL facility and is the "expert" that Dana White keeps citing, who determined Jones "did not re-ingest" Turinabol.

Edit: Dim pointed out that he does have his name on papers as a lead investigator. However, 90% of these papers are in garbage tier journals, where you can literally buy yourself a publication. A post-doc friend of mine makes a side income running an impact factor 2 journal in which people PAY HIM to have their papers published. He shops out the "peer reviews" to other PhDs and post-docs.

Basically only impact factor 5-6+ papers actually matter in biological sciences. And even then, many bigger PIs won't even publish below impact factor 10.

https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=DA+eichner+dendritic+cells+immune+ANU&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_ylo=1995&as_yhi=2007
Click to expand...

You have all that education but your dumbass still got dubbed on an mma messagebord. Fucking genius you are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,981
Messages
55,459,192
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top