A state intelligence service invented the story in 1983, planted it in a newspaper it owned, and admitted it in 1992. And there are two blood samples from Kinshasa, from 1959 and 1960, already different from each other.
Mortality in his own ward fell from 11.4 per cent to under two in a year. He did not write it up for fourteen years, and when he did he called his readers murderers. Both halves of that killed women.
A cheap chemical shrank tumours in a laboratory in 2007 and went round the world in a week. The trial that would settle it has still never been run. The reason is not a conspiracy. It is arithmetic.
Shown nothing and asked to draw well-known icons from memory, strangers produce identical errors at rates up to 78 per cent. The obvious explanations were tested and none fit. Nobody knows why, and the researchers say so.
Serology from four continents finds a variant protein in 41 people, all descended from one line. Every explanation for it is ordinary — and the alternative reading is a blood libel with a new coat of paint.
The figure is 38.7 per cent against about 15 in three comparable cohorts. The blood service's own statistician attached a footnote before we saw the data: cohort D was recruited by a campaign that asked for rhesus-negative donors.
Fifty-nine studies, pooled, showing a clear effect at high exposure. At the concentrations North American water systems actually use, the confidence interval crosses zero. The dose–response curve is the finding. The headline number is not.
