Deletion of Inverse Warburg effect

Comment: and '''protect-redirect''', per RHaworth. It seems to me that the sourcing is strung together as  as described by Jytdog, and that the scientific sourcing that is not synth is pretty much from one research group, and thus fails the notability requirement for sourcing that is independent
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: per my nomination when I speedied this, which was along the lines of -- this is a fringey theory, the direct references for which are the few people who are working on it.  The other refs are used as they are in a scientific paper, where content based on them is strung together to make an argument.  In WP this is .  The original article appeared to me to be an effort to use WP to publicize and lend validity to the theory and its immediate recreation only supports that notion.  We are not a vehicle for that per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN||WP:PROMO)