Autism Study Rubish – Retracted By Lancet
There is a mystery surrounding the idea of peer reviewed scientific studies. While the idea is meritorious, publishing in peer reviewed literature has gone from being the best way to present research to a dubious method of presenting agenda originated studies masquerading as legitimate science.
The latest example is a study published in 1998 by the formerly respectable British medical journal, Lancet. This is the famous study that found a statistical connection between autism and the common vaccinations recieved by infants worldwide.
Since then, parents, interest groups, and almost everyone else proceeded along the path of refusing vaccinations to infants because it was erroneously thought the vaccinations caused or contributed to a child being autistic.
There is enough misinformation in this world, and Lancet should be shut down for taking 12 years to retract the bogus study. This is not the first time Lancet has been caught presenting politically correct studies as science.
So, what happened to all that peer review that is supposed to keep these rubbish studies from being published? It simply doesn’t happen. In the case of climatology, the authors of various studies choose the “peers” who will review the article. How about that? Peer review by buddy.
I don’t know why the gross statistical errors in the autism study were not uncovered before publication in 1998, but it seems that the term, peer review, is just another expression.
bb