Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Professor Malcolm Hooper's letter to Dr Richard Horton, 15th April 2016

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Daisymay, Apr 20, 2016.

  1. Daisymay

    Daisymay Senior Member

    Messages:
    712
    Likes:
    3,836
    Professor Malcolm Hooper's letter to Dr Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, regarding the PACE Trial,15th April 2016.

    http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/Hooper-to-Horton-15-April-2016.htm

    The letter was sent by special delivery and the printed name of the signatory was obtained.

    It was also sent (electronically) to the Editor of Lancet Psychiatry, Dr Niall Boyce, who was courteous enough to acknowledge it promptly and who promised to read it and note its contents.

    It was not sent to the Editor of Psychological Medicine, given that Professors Matthew Hotopf, Michael Sharpe and Simon Wessely are on its editorial board.
     
  2. worldbackwards

    worldbackwards A unique snowflake

    Messages:
    2,091
    Likes:
    10,354
    Earth
    Because Horton's so much more receptive and reasonable.
     
    Invisible Woman, BurnA and Aurator like this.
  3. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,257
    Likes:
    33,637
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    Horton is in a bind. He has had on his watch at least three studies considered some of the most problematic "scientific" papers of all time. He has defended all three. Two are current issues, including PACE. If he is undone here, is the next question "why is he editor at all"? That might be a big part of why he is so reticent.
     
  4. A.B.

    A.B. Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,562
    Likes:
    21,596
    There seems to be a culture of viewing retractions as failure, rather than as committment to quality.
     
    zzz, Kalliope, GreyOwl and 11 others like this.
  5. BurnA

    BurnA Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,989
    Likes:
    8,819
    Indeed, why don't they have an award for most important retraction. This would at least recognise the importance of retractions.
     
    soti, TiredSam, mango and 5 others like this.
  6. Aurator

    Aurator Senior Member

    Messages:
    623
    Likes:
    3,058
    I suspect Horton won't retract or renounce at this late stage after being intransigent for so long. He has more to lose by retracting and implicitly acknowledging he was wrong than by simply continuing to be intransigent. He knows his best chance of preserving his integrity is to maintain, however improbably, that he acted in good faith all along and that he doesn't give in to "harassment".
     
    BurnA likes this.
  7. worldbackwards

    worldbackwards A unique snowflake

    Messages:
    2,091
    Likes:
    10,354
    Earth
    Sadly for him, people are starting to notice the smell:

    https://forbetterscience.wordpress.com/2016/04/05/does-the-lancet-care-about-patients/
     
  8. Revenge is a dish best served cold....

    I think an icicle is being shoved up Horton, Wessley etc's arseholes right about now!

    evil-smiley.gif
     
  9. Daisymay

    Daisymay Senior Member

    Messages:
    712
    Likes:
    3,836
  10. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,266
    Likes:
    26,679
    Dolphin and Yogi like this.
  11. Hilary

    Hilary Senior Member

    Messages:
    173
    Likes:
    852
    UK
    Great letter from Professor Hooper - I really hope he doesn't let the Lancet editors off the hook..
     
  12. Large Donner

    Large Donner Senior Member

    Messages:
    784
    Likes:
    3,321
    Don't be so vexatious!!
     
    Countrygirl, Solstice and Kati like this.
  13. Comet

    Comet I'm Not Imaginary

    Messages:
    658
    Likes:
    3,489
  14. Yogi

    Yogi Senior Member

    Messages:
    998
    Likes:
    6,239
    Good to see Prof Hooper continue to challenge PACE trial and the Lancet.

    I would like to see the response @Daisymay @Esther12 but given it was sent on same day (15 April) this may be all of it? Given how far they dug themselves in they are choosing not to give any substantive response apart from reiterating their existing position.

    It seems that with the Wakefield paper and now the Macchiarini scandal the Lancet and Richard Horton are getting a reputation for publishing fraudulent papers.

    Lancet and Horton are in a difficult situation and avoiding making the difficult but inevitable final result- Retraction. Instead the evidence will continue to build up against them and history will not judge them kindly given the harm and injury of GET to ME sufferers.

    By digging their heels in they are only going to make matters unnecessarily worse for themselves in the long term given we are not going anywhere. The same applies to QMUL. These institutions are bigger than White, Sharpe and Chalder.

    This is where the governance of an institution should step in and preserve their own brand reputation for their own long term interests.. The Lancet should put itself above the the self-interests of White, Sharpe and Chalder and simply retract.

    It does not matter really what they do as they (and QMUL) are now in a LOSE - LOSE situation. It just means we have to wait a little bit longer but we will prevail!!

    Perhaps the Lancet may wish to use this as their corporate logo?

    upload_2016-5-4_12-42-15.jpeg
     
    GreyOwl, Kati, Countrygirl and 3 others like this.
  15. Countrygirl

    Countrygirl ME is not MUS

    Messages:
    2,698
    Likes:
    13,164
    UK
    A corker of a letter! Thank you so much Professor Hooper! We are so privileged to have men (and women) of integrity fighting for us. Sadly, this virtue is a rare commodity and there are so few human beings of their calibre. They are indeed our 'treasures of the darkness'.
     
  16. Sean

    Sean Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,170
    Likes:
    17,232
    To have to retract one major paper during an editorial career could be seen as misfortune. To have to retract two is starting to look careless. A third retraction should always be accompanied by a letter of resignation.
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2016
  17. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,266
    Likes:
    26,679
    I'd have thought lots of journals should be retracting lots of papers - or at least placing expressions of concern on them. The way that Horton seems so resistant of criticism is the real problem.
     
    Kati, Daisymay, Sean and 3 others like this.
  18. Sean

    Sean Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,170
    Likes:
    17,232
    Fair point, Esther.
     
    Battery Muncher likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page