Tribunal orders QMUL to release anonymised PACE data 16 Aug 2016

Snowdrop

Snowdrop

Rebel without a biscuit
Messages
2,933
Yogi said:
Anyone associated with PACE scandal/Lancet should now assess the situation and decide whether they wish to jump ship, blow the whistle and leave the main rats to sink!

I know QMUL et al read this forum so here is something for them to deliberate over:

https://www.gov.uk/whistleblowing/what-is-a-whistleblower
Click to expand...

:lol: That's mighty considerate of you. Let's hope someone checks in with reality and sees where this is all headed (in PACEland the icebergs are not melting)
 
Y

Yogi

Senior Member
Messages
1,132
Kalliope said:
No mixing :) They even defended him...
Click to expand...

Paolo Macchiarini is not guilty of scientific misconduct
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)00118-X/fulltext?rss=yes

Thoroughly recommend EVERYONE to read this Defense of Machiarrini from last year (September 2015) and contrast with yesterday and today's news (5 and 6 September 2016). This was an editorial by the Lancet and presumably Richard Horton.

It really shows the wrong-headed, defensive and flawed mindset we are up against. See how wrong Richard Horton and the Lancet were.

It is a stunning editorial!

Horton should not be worthy of even cleaning the Lancet's offices never mind editor in chief.
 
Esther12

Esther12

Senior Member
Messages
13,774
user9876 said:
I thought that was funding for a long term follow up study.

In the MRC's database for the trial

http://gtr.rcuk.ac.uk/projects?ref=G0200434

Under the further funding tab in the outcomes section they list

Arthritis Research UK
Click to expand...

Very odd. Why on Earth with ARUK be funding a longer-term follow up for PACE when it's been acknowledged that the LTFU data is almost uninterpretable. Oh yeah, and the whole study is just junk.
 
TiredSam

TiredSam

The wise nematode hibernates
Messages
2,677
Location
Germany
Yogi said:
Thoroughly recommend EVERYONE to read this Defense of Machiarrini from last year
Click to expand...
Thanks, I did :).

There are several lessons to be drawn from this case. First, responsibility for investigating allegations of research fraud falls to the institution where the work in question was completed.
Click to expand...

Yep. And any review or investigation of PACE should be carried out by its authors or their universities, and end there. At least the Lancet is consistent :rolleyes:

What we could really do with is a television documentary, it seems to have been the most fast and direct way to cut all the crap in the Macchiarini case.
 
Y

Yogi

Senior Member
Messages
1,132
JES said:
I did a quick check with WinMerge as well, comparing the latest version with a searchable PDF version of the original document that a member post here.

Apart from being searchable now, there were some other minor spellings corrected, "seasoning" corrected to "reasoning" on p. 6 and "Ron Davies" to "Ron Davis" on p. 32. Didn't spot any major differences.
Click to expand...

Thanks @A.B. @JES @Bob for checking and confirming back to us that only minor changes.:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
B

Bob

Senior Member
Messages
16,455
Location
England (south coast)
Last edited:
Kalliope

Kalliope

Senior Member
Messages
367
Location
Norway
Open letter to Queen Mary University London about PACE published at virology blog from:

prof Ronald Davis
prof emeritus Jonathan Edwards
prof Rebecca Goldin
prof Bruce Levin
Zaher Nahle
prof Vincent Racaniello
dr. Charles Shepherd
prof John Swartzberg

The PACE trial remains under an enormous cloud, and the requested data will provide answers to some of the questions. Given the tribunal’s powerful and persuasive rejection of QMUL’s arguments, prolonging the legal process will only further tarnish the university’s reputation, waste more public funds, and discourage others from participating in future QMUL-sponsored research—all for an indefensible and ultimately losing cause.

We strongly urge QMUL not to appeal the decision of the First-Tier Tribunal and to release the PACE trial data as soon as possible.
Click to expand...
 
S

Sidereal

Senior Member
Messages
4,856
Yogi said:
Paolo Macchiarini is not guilty of scientific misconduct
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)00118-X/fulltext?rss=yes

Thoroughly recommend EVERYONE to read this Defense of Machiarrini from last year (September 2015) and contrast with yesterday and today's news (5 and 6 September 2016). This was an editorial by the Lancet and presumably Richard Horton.

It really shows the wrong-headed, defensive and flawed mindset we are up against. See how wrong Richard Horton and the Lancet were.

It is a stunning editorial!

Horton should not be worthy of even cleaning the Lancet's offices never mind editor in chief.
Click to expand...

It was similar with the Wakefield fiasco. Horton has a striking ability to position himself on the wrong side of every argument. It's quite a skill actually. I can't fathom how he ever became editor in chief, let alone stayed editor in chief after all these calamities.
 
U

user9876

Senior Member
Messages
4,556
Sidereal said:
It was similar with the Wakefield fiasco. Horton has a striking ability to position himself on the wrong side of every argument. It's quite a skill actually. I can't fathom how he ever became editor in chief, let alone stayed editor in chief after all these calamities.
Click to expand...

I suspect that the lancet's sales or profits have increased so he keeps his job, they probably aren't even thinking of the brand damage.

His attitude seems to reflect one in the UK of not challenging those in authority.
 
Large Donner

Large Donner

Senior Member
Messages
866
I suspect that the lancet's sales or profits have increased so he keeps his job, they probably aren't even thinking of the brand damage.

His attitude seems to reflect one in the UK of not challenging those in authority.
Click to expand...


I really think that much of modern life in high profile well paid jobs has become somewhat like football management.

One knows that financially you are set up economically compared to the average wage, you have a given amount of time in the hot seat and no matter how or when you are sacked, or how well you perform, you walk of with a great big pay off or even paid up to the end of your contract which is usually obscenely high remuneration.

For some reason, unlike the average person you can walk into another obscenely high paid job regardless of the fact that its public that you were let go for being useless.

I guess when you are doing the bidding of the establishment or have become a piece of furniture inside the establishment you just don't really care.
 
moosie

moosie

Messages
85
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back