They published (and retracted) a key study that linked anti-malarial drug HCQ to increased risk of death and irregularity in heart rhythms in coronavirus patients.
That is to be expected with cutting edge research. Studies get retracted all the time. The vetting process is not perfect and never can be. Especially when there are bad actors gaming the system.
You could attack Lancet and Elsevier in general on other grounds. But this in my opinion is not one of them.
Regardless of the Hamas issue, that anti-vax publication did untold harm. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary vetting.
Am going off topic, but the BMJ (another titan in the journal industry, and it is an industry) was responsible for publishing a paper incorrectly linking plaques with Alzheimer’s which ended up wasting billions of dollars through more than a decade of other followup studies chasing that angle.
It was only debunked a couple of years ago. To be fair it is also irresponsible for all that subsequent research to have gone ahead, seeking glory for “the cure” while nobody cared to replicate the study.
As a science under-graduate myself I am disillusioned especially since my Mum has had dementia for thirteen years now.
Lancet is the same journal which published Andrew Wakefield’s bs claim that vaccines cause autism.
They also publish almost all cutting edge medical research. So what’s your point?
As if you didn’t know my point…
Their credibility is damaged enough to be sceptical about this report (which is not even medical research).
And here is another example:
They published (and retracted) a key study that linked anti-malarial drug HCQ to increased risk of death and irregularity in heart rhythms in coronavirus patients.
That is to be expected with cutting edge research. Studies get retracted all the time. The vetting process is not perfect and never can be. Especially when there are bad actors gaming the system.
You could attack Lancet and Elsevier in general on other grounds. But this in my opinion is not one of them.
Regardless of the Hamas issue, that anti-vax publication did untold harm. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary vetting.
Am going off topic, but the BMJ (another titan in the journal industry, and it is an industry) was responsible for publishing a paper incorrectly linking plaques with Alzheimer’s which ended up wasting billions of dollars through more than a decade of other followup studies chasing that angle.
It was only debunked a couple of years ago. To be fair it is also irresponsible for all that subsequent research to have gone ahead, seeking glory for “the cure” while nobody cared to replicate the study.
As a science under-graduate myself I am disillusioned especially since my Mum has had dementia for thirteen years now.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis