Here's the relevant bits I got from the link.
"Professor Danin told the International Botanical Congress in St Louis, in the US, that blood stains on the shroud were similar to those on the Sudarium. ...
However independent research carried out in the US has found no evidence of blood on the shroud - ruling out the link between it and the Sudarium, according to BBC Science's Toby Murcott. "
Hmmm. The last sentence implies that Prof. Danin is not independent. So, what is he?
The main point to be drawn from the above is, if independent research has shown that there is no blood on the shroud, how does a so-called expert assert that there is?
Here's what I have so far ... From a previous post, there is blood on the shroud, and it is of type AB. From this post, however, there is no blood on the shroud. Oh the miracles of shroud science!