Article Image

IPFS News Link • Vaccines and Vaccinations

It's Time To Hold the Medical Journals Accountable

• https://www.lewrockwell.com, By Steve Kirsch

This here is Adrian Gonzalez-Lopez, Editor of BMC Infectious Diseases.

He decided to retract the Skidmore paper for reasons that do not satisfy the COPE criteria. All of his concerns could have been addressed by amending the paper. Retraction was unwarranted.

For example, one doctor wrote me:

Ok.  I read through everything.  Impressions are:

Skidmore is a very good author; he did a very good job writing the paper and dealing with all the potential issues/challenges that could come up when he wrote it.  His language was very careful and spot on for what he was trying to do.

The reasons they are citing for the retraction are nonsensical and by that logic you could never publish a paper based on survey results.

The journal made the decision to ax the paper and weren't interested in any argument to the contrary.

Grounds for retraction

When papers are retracted post-publication, it is usually because of very serious errors like it was found that they fabricated the data. For example, the Surgisphere paper.

The COPE guidelines for retraction are described in detail in this article:

They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)

It constitutes plagiarism

The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)

It contains material or data without authorisation for use

Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy)

It reports unethical research

It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process

The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.


thelibertyadvisor.com/declare