Farcical! By his logic, the MMR-Autism papers should not have been retracted from The Lancet, as people can read criticism of them elsewhere. It really is an indefensible position if you value the role of a scientific journal as a place for supposedly verified, reliable information.
The tone of the letter is also pretty unpleasant, dripping with snarky condescension.
I agree with Charles Shepherd - if the editor will not act, the publisher might. They'll probably respond, at least initially, by saying they don't exercise editorial control over their journals but at some point a publisher does have to take responsibility for what they're publishing. CUP do not want to acquire a reputation for printing discredited drivel.
The tone of the letter is also pretty unpleasant, dripping with snarky condescension.
I agree with Charles Shepherd - if the editor will not act, the publisher might. They'll probably respond, at least initially, by saying they don't exercise editorial control over their journals but at some point a publisher does have to take responsibility for what they're publishing. CUP do not want to acquire a reputation for printing discredited drivel.