Scientists post open letter to Lancet on Virology Blog - call for independent re-analysis of PACE

[Sasha]

Great!

http://www.virology.ws/2015/11/13/an-open-letter-to-dr-richard-horton-and-the-lancet/

 

[Sasha]

I'm not kidding, I've got tears in my eyes.

I'm so grateful to the signatories:

Ronald W. Davis, PhD
Professor of Biochemistry and Genetics
Stanford University

Jonathan C.W. Edwards, MD
Emeritus Professor of Medicine
University College London

Leonard A. Jason, PhD
Professor of Psychology
DePaul University

Bruce Levin, PhD
Professor of Biostatistics
Columbia University

Vincent R. Racaniello, PhD
Professor of Microbiology and Immunology
Columbia University

Arthur L. Reingold, MD
Professor of Epidemiology
University of California, Berkeley

Thank you so much, @Jonathan Edwards.

 

[Cheshire]

"Un immense merci" @Jonathan Edwards and all the other signatories.

 

[Gijs]

Thank you all for this incredible review of flaws. I have studied statistics. From my perspective i suspect severe bias and different outcomes.

 

[Sasha]

That blog takes comments, BTW, and I think it would be great if people expressed their appreciation there.

 

[snowathlete]

Brilliant, nice and concise.

 

[Denise]

This is a great letter and I appreciate those who wrote and signed it.

Was it posted solely on the Virology blog or was it also sent to Dr. Horton and Lancet?

 

[Countrygirl]

Excellent! Thank you to all concerned.

After 40 years, the above is a gross understatement, but you should see the comment I wrote in rough! It was just too emotional after all these years of medical negligence, misunderstanding, insults and outright abuse to post.

 

[Sasha]

This is a great letter and I appreciate those who wrote and signed it.

Was it posted solely on the Virology blog or was it also sent to Dr. Horton and Lancet?

I don't know but I would imagine they've sent a copy - wouldn't be much point, otherwise.

 

[Wildcat]

.
Its an Open Letter to Richard Horton, Editor of the Lancet, and The Lancet.

Richard Horton can hardly ignore it.

 

[richio76]

Great letter. It'll be ignored, of course, but it could hopefully draw more like minds out of the woodwork. Only so many voices can be dismissed. Thank you to @Jonathan Edwards and the others involved.

 

[Daisymay]

AMAZING!

Thank you so very, very much to all the signatories, thanks Prof Edwards!

 

[Denise]

I don't know but I would imagine they've sent a copy - wouldn't be much point, otherwise.

I very much hope they have sent it but it wasn't clear to me on the blog, if they had.
Occupy CFS seems to indicate that the letter has been sent.
I hope that is the case because while blogs appear to be monitored by all sorts of organizations/people, I don't think one can assume that Lancet or Dr. Horton do. So actually sending a letter would seem to give a better chance of it being read by them.

 

[Esther12]

.
Its an Open Letter to Richard Horton, Editor of the Lancet, and The Lancet. Richard Horton can hardly ignore it.

We'll see. Horton is in pretty deep with PACE. He might still be hoping he can get away with ignoring the problems even if it means making the Lancet look even worse.

 

[DeGenesis]

A quote I'm sure most of you are familiar with.

"The case against science is straightforward: 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 an obsession for pursuing
fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has
taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put
it, “poor methods get results”.

- Richard Horton

I wasn't familiar with his article. My mom brought it to my attention after reading it in our local newspaper.

I haven't been following this saga, so I don't know Dr. Horton's disposition. I can only hope that he takes his own words seriously.

 

[Marco]

Horton has an interesting bio and is not new to controversy it seems :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Horton_(editor)

and Elsevier (Lancet publisher) don't seem too fazed by criticism from nearly 400 professors and specialists :

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...aganda-over-its-coverage-of-the-10199892.html

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

"The case against science is straightforward: 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 an obsession for pursuing
fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has
taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put
it, “poor methods get results”.

- Richard Horton

Well I would say that's Mornington Crescent isn't it?

At least it is something to relish.

 

[charles shepherd]

This is excellent

However, it's worth noting that many of these key points have already been raised in previous correspondence relating to previous PACE trial papers.

Eg the letters to the editor that followed the first paper on 'recovery' following PACE trial interventions

http://www.meassociation.org.uk/.../pace-trial-letters.../

These criticisms were very firmly dismissed by the authors and by the Lancet.

So we are still on an uphill struggle...

 

[charles shepherd]

Well I would say that's Mornington Crescent isn't it?

At least it is something to relish.

This is the full comment piece from Richard Horton

http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1.pdf

Would be interesting to know roughly what percentage of research that is published in The Lancet would fit this description!

 

[Sasha]

This is excellent

However, it's worth noting that many of these key points have already been raised in previous correspondence relating to previous PACE trial papers.

Eg the letters to the editor that followed the first paper on 'recovery' following PACE trial interventions

http://www.meassociation.org.uk/.../pace-trial-letters.../

These criticisms were very firmly dismissed by the authors and by the Lancet.

So we are still on an uphill struggle...

But what's new is that it's big-name scientists who are saying it and it's not buried in the correspondence column of The Lancet - and therefore not under the control of The Lancet.

I think it's important to recognise when things have stepped up a gear!