Medical research fraud: who cares? [Whistleblowing researchers] have sent their concerns about more than 750 papers to the journals that published them. But, all too often, either nothing seems to happen or investigations take years. Only 80 of the studies they have flagged have so far been retracted. Worse, many have been included in systematic reviews—the sort of research round-ups that inform clinical practice.
Another terrific newsletter. I was a little worried about the quote from Deer about Ben Goldacre. Goldacre is associated with the Cochrane Project and was always skeptical of Wakefield. Deer's comments sort of imply Goldacre was blaming the media instead of Wakefield but his book was explaining how the media was complicit in Wakefield's sins and magnified his claims among a broader analysis of media failures in reporting research. An interesting Australian connection to Wakefield was that he shacked up with Elle MacPherson. Noel Turnbull
The fabrication of unreality: medical fraud edition
Thanks Noel!
Nicholas
Another terrific newsletter. I was a little worried about the quote from Deer about Ben Goldacre. Goldacre is associated with the Cochrane Project and was always skeptical of Wakefield. Deer's comments sort of imply Goldacre was blaming the media instead of Wakefield but his book was explaining how the media was complicit in Wakefield's sins and magnified his claims among a broader analysis of media failures in reporting research. An interesting Australian connection to Wakefield was that he shacked up with Elle MacPherson. Noel Turnbull