He's pretending that public pushback was responsible for getting the researchers to retract, but that's not at all what happened. In reality, there were some questions that experts and news media brought up that called into question the particular dataset that was being provided by Surgisphere. One of the major things that happened was, as you mentioned, The Guardian reported on May 28th that researchers in Australia reviewed the data in the Surgisphere set, which reflected 73 deaths from COVID-19 in the country at that point, when there was actually only 67 official deaths. This set off alarms as to where exactly this data was coming from. The Australian researchers contacted Lancet, who contacted the study's authors for clarification, who in turn requested Surgisphere authenticate their data. To make matters more suspicious, Sapondasai, the head of Surgesphere, released a statement saying that, quote, a hospital from Asia had accidentally been included in the Australian data. From there, you can't rely on this data unless it's audited. And studies that relied on it have to be retracted, which is why those two were. This had absolutely nothing to do with public backlash. It had to do with Australian researchers attempting to conduct a study Science!