Peer- Reviewed…..really?
It's bad when an editor-in-chief of a prestigious journal like Lancet freely admits that the entire medical evidence database is "polluted". This is a formal admission to the extent of academic fraud that has taken place with the prospect that the so-called evidence is beyond repair. What right have any of the proponents of this type of data have to cast doubt on "practitioner experience" when deciding what is best for their patient. The answer is none!
Gerald Quigley - An advocate for Integrative Medicine
The Editor-in-Chief of the Lancet has recently declared that “much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.
Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with obsessions for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness”.
Interesting, his comments have been largely ignored by the mainstream media. I wonder why?
The Editor wrote his shocking comments after attending a symposium on the reproducibility and reliability of biochemical research at the Welcome Trust in London.
He noted the confidentiality of “Chatham House” rules where attendees are forbidden to name names.
He commented thus: “A lot of what is published is incorrect. I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs or slides.”
Along the same lines, the Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine stated: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.”
I’m therefore puzzled at the perceived outrage by medical academia when Blackmores or Swisse Wellness join with research departments of quality Australian Universities.
These folk claim that bias will prevail, that resulting research will be tainted, and these claims are forthcoming before anything has actually been published!
Interesting times!
Leave a comment