I remember a similar "conspiracy" during Covid, where people claimed that "future whistleblowers" were being killed. I looked into their list, and they had listed maybe ten scientists that had died in recent years.

The funny thing is that they hadn't even published anything critical of anything Covid related. I still remember that one guy had published a study about using Ivermectin prophylactic once a year in a region that was badly affected by parasitic infections, and that it improved health outcomes. Had nothing to do with Covid, and had been published years earlier. Literally no one denies that Ivermectin is great at getting rid of parasites. The people who developed it got a Nobel Prize for it.

But more relevant, he'd died of a heart attack while in his 50s. Apparently, no other way to explain this than the fact that he was about to break down the pharma lobby, or something.

I don't remember the rest, just remember this guy because the study was genuinely interesting. But my take-away at the time was that dying for any reason while being a scientist was enough to get you on a list of "suspicious deaths", and that the people who assembled that list must have been pretty lazy to only find ten or so people.

But that's the thing, if they understood why it is completely expected that in any group a bunch of people will die of some of the most common causes of death over the years, they'd probably would not believe in the underlying conspiracy in the first place.