Hmm. I told you in chat I'd take a look at this, so here we go, quick review:
I feel like there are parts here that are too science-heavy, and parts that aren't clinical enough. For example:
SCP-XXXX is able to change the conformation of normal human PrPC, effectively turning each PrPC into a molecular instance of SCP-XXXX; this, in turn, alters the way the proteins interconnect, by exposing a high-affinity binding site on the molecule, and thus facilitating protein-protein interconnections.
Not only is this one sentence that can be split into two sentences, it touches on a few aspects of biology (cell signalling?) that the average reader might not know too much about. What does normal PrPC do, aside from be located on cell membranes? You could actually remove the part about "thus facilitating protein-protein interconnections", since it doesn't really contribute to the plot or a reader's understanding at that point.
And quick question, is there a reason the footnote text from ROWSANNAH kind of goes off on tangents? It's cute I guess, but seems distracting and not a function that someone would want when reading SCP documentation.
If a subject gets into contact with even a single molecule of SCP-XXXX,
Remember, don't refer to an individual as a "subject" unless you've established the experimental protocol they're being subjected to. If there's no research design or observation ongoing, they're not a subject of anything and shouldn't be called such. In this context, it almost looks like the anomaly only manifests when there's an experiment going on.
Also, the phrases "gets into contact" and "even a single molecule" aren't particularly professional. I would use, "Should SCP-XXXX come into contact with [whatever suffices to trigger effect]…"
Overall… I feel like there's some good stuff towards the end, but the description is a little too science jargon-y to figure out or visualize well on the first read. If you hadn't stated that the "draft is about a disease that makes infected subjects detonate if someone calls them on their phone" in the thread summary, I probably wouldn't have been able to figure that out from the description, which is a little problematic since usually the description orients the reader to what they're about to learn about next.
Personally, I think the logs have some good content (if you wanted to go the SCP route I might have trimmed out the extraneous dialogue and actions in the incident/camera log), but the work on the whole seems to be much better suited to a tale than an SCP article.