Dr. Horton Blames You, Everyone Else
From ACSH Despatch Feb 19th, 2010
In light of The Lancet‘s recent retraction of Dr. Wakefield’s 1998 study linking the MMR vaccine to autism, NPR interviewed Dr. Richard Horton, the journal’s editor, in order to determine how such an egregious paper was allowed to be published in the first place. Dr. Horton muses, “This was a system failure. We failed, I think the media failed, I think government failed, I think the scientific community failed. And we all have to very critically examine what part we played in this.”
“The media, in my opinion, was not at fault,” says Dr. Whelan. “This is one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world. When The Lancet publishes something so provocative, how could the media not pick it up? He should have said that he regrets publishing this. He was wrong. He should have apologized, but he never did.”
“When the reporter asked how bad science made it into such a respected journal, he didn’t answer the question at all,” says Dr. Ross. “It’s obvious that he shouldn’t have published the study because it’s a terrible study. He tries to spread the blame among the government and media, but that’s not the whole truth. Wakefield is mostly to blame, but Horton was complicit. I don’t accuse him of getting on the stump and going around telling people that vaccines cause autism like Wakefield did right after it was published, but of publishing such a flawed study in the first place.”
Naturally, He’s Looking Out for the Kids
The retraction of The Lancet study was not enough to mollify anti-vaccine conspiracy theorists, as evidenced by a rambling, vitriolic essay on Age of Autism, which calls itself the “daily web newspaper of the autism epidemic.”
The author directs most of his fury at ACSH Advisor Dr. Steven Novella of the Yale University School of Medicine but manages to smear ACSH Advisor and vaccine expert Dr. Paul Offit, as well as ACSH itself, with the standard references to our vast treasury of industry money that we only wish existed.
“ACSH does get involved with these vaccine debates, so it’s inevitable that these people will target us at some point,” says Dr. Whelan. “We are accused of being funded by money from vaccine manufacturers, which we are not, and also being in cahoots with Dr. Offit and Dr. Novella, which we are proud to say we are, towards the advancement of science-based policy and education.”
Pundit’s thoughts:
When it comes to correction of peer-reviewer errors, the wheels of the Republic of Science turn slooooowly.
