Fluge & Mella's pre-trial study highlights life-changing potential of rituximab
Sasha gives the background and Simon gives the interpretation of the latest study from Haukeland, published today...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Retraction Watch blog

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by LaurelW, Aug 5, 2011.

  1. LaurelW

    LaurelW Senior Member

    Messages:
    560
    Likes:
    121
    Utah
    Today on Science Friday, Ira Flatow interviewed Adam and Ivan of the Retraction Watch blog. http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/

    I found it very interesting, so I decided to check it out. They have a list of all the retracted studies and papers. Paging through them, it seemed apparent that most of the papers were retracted due to some pretty egregious acts, such as falsifying data, plagiarism, and just plain incompetence. A lot of them are years and years after publication. This got me wondering about the Science paper. It's in there too, on May 31st. And the possible reasons for Science asking for the retraction.

    http://retractionwatch.wordpress.co...when-they-refuse-issue-expression-of-concern/

    I recommend reading the comments following the article. They are really informative and discuss the situation in detail.

    My take-away from all this is that, (as has been mentioned in other threads) it's really premature, and with not strong enough reasons that the paper has been asked to be retracted. The fact that politics are involved floats to the top of the list, in my opinion.
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page