Some years ago there was a forensic pathologist who did studies on how fluids would have spread on the body of someone tortured and crucified as per the gospels. Alas I don’t recall his name and when this was. He found the fluid patterns on the Shroud fit this quite well, whereas depictions of the same in art over the centuries did NOT fit it well. He concluded the blood spatter patterns on the Shroud were very strong evidence it had once covered, if not Christ then someone treated as Christ was reported to have been treated. So now there is this ‘scientific’ study claiming the opposite. I’m skeptical and would like, at least, for someone to compare the two studies.
Was the shroud under the care of the Vatican prior to those tests? Don't tourists come from all over the world to the Vatican City, carrying particles on their clothing an hair that get carried by the breeze in Italy? Don't birds fly over the Vatican and drop droppings on the ground that are then transferred onto peoples' shoes and walked elsewhere? Can't particles find their way into the heating and ventilation systems of the researchers? Just how forensic were the researchers -- did they wear hair coverings and latex gloves at all times? Were their hospital gowns made in China?