Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Topic

Lancet

Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
September 21, 2021
Categorized
Intelligent Design, Peer review, Philosophy, Science
Tagged
, ,

At Lancet: An appeal for an honest debate in science about the origin of COVID-19

Denyse O'Leary
September 21, 2021
Intelligent Design, Peer review, Philosophy, Science
We wish Jacques van Helden and his co-authors good luck getting an honest discussion going. It’s not like China is going to become transparent anytime soon. In any event, few virus researchers would want to be told bluntly that, because gain-of-function research in viruses can go badly wrong, they now face controls. Some nations wouldn’t heed the controls. And nature never responds - on her own - to calls for clarification. Most likely, whatever happened with COVID will need to happen again a few more times until a pattern develops. Then we’ll see. It doesn’t help that Lancet itself became politicized in recent years. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
September 30, 2020
Categorized
Intelligent Design, Peer review
Tagged
, , , ,

Are science journals starting to behave like Facebook?

Denyse O'Leary
September 30, 2020
Intelligent Design, Peer review
Chuck Dinerstein, MD, argues the case. " You would think that if a fraction of that money, say 1%, which is about $30 million, could be redirected at paying for peer-review, we might get a better quality product." Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
September 23, 2020
Categorized
Intelligent Design, Medicine, Peer review, Science
Tagged
, ,

Surgisphere scandal results in change in editorial practices at The Lancet

Denyse O'Leary
September 23, 2020
Intelligent Design, Medicine, Peer review, Science
At The Scientist: "Like Malički, Watson and other researchers note that the changes don’t address larger, more general issues highlighted by Surgisphere’s papers, including journals’ reluctance to push authors to share data and code for published studies, and an overall lack of transparency in how papers are reviewed before and after publication. " Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
November 21, 2019
Categorized
Climate change, Global Warming, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Peer review
Tagged
, ,

Science decadence: A “Woke” medical journal’s war on having kids

Denyse O'Leary
November 21, 2019
Climate change, Global Warming, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Peer review
When institutions get this crazy (and Berezow provides a number of further examples of Lancet gone crazy) , it’s usually because their reason for existence has been undermined. Is it Lancet that we don’t need any more or medical journals generally? We’ll be able to find out by seeing whether a number of other journals follow suit and ramp up the crazy. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 16, 2019
Categorized
Culture, Intelligent Design, Medicine, Peer review
Tagged
,

Why has a historic medical publication gone weird?

Denyse O'Leary
March 16, 2019
Culture, Intelligent Design, Medicine, Peer review

A science writer asks, citing several distinctly odd viewpoints aired in the journal that was founded in 1823, including This year, the weirdness continued. A paper in The Lancet argued that certain food experts should be banned from food policy discussions. (Of course, the experts that should be banned are any that are associated with industry, because industry = bad.) And then, The Lancet slandered surgeons, using shady statistics to blame them for killing millions of people every year. The study was so bad that our typically calm, cool, and collected Dr. Charles Dinerstein worried that his head would explode. Apparently, whoever is operating The Lancet’s Twitter feed said, “Hold my beer, and watch this.” Here is what the organization Read More ›