News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until p... by adolph on Monday July 19, 2021 @05:43PM (#27887594)
The article is about all of medical research. Vaccine development is part of medical research and is therefore included. I did not attempt to "make it a statement about one very specific subset." I pointed out that the article is similar to the kind of article seized upon by people who have vaccine hesitancy ideations.

Take your straw elsewhere.

Re:Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until p... by AnimalMuppet on Monday July 19, 2021 @08:29PM (#27888865)
So, on an article that you admit is about all medical research, you asked:

> Is this some vaccine hesitancy in disguise from BMJ?

Why, in an article that's about all of medicine, do you ask about BMJ's stance on vaccines? Why not ask about their stance on chemotherapy? Why single out vaccines? And, in the current climate, are you talking about all vaccines, or are you really talking about vaccines for one particular disease?

That question you asked is your innuendo, not my strawman. Maybe you should take that somewhere else.

Re:Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until p... by adolph on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @09:37AM (#27893528)
The timing and motivation of publishing something is a valid line of inquiry and not innuendo. Vaccine hesitancy is a salient topic of the day. A world leader accused a major social network of killing people by distributing misinformation [0]. Why would a publication choose this moment to editorialize about fraud in medical research? This wasn't a long running experiment from which new information was developed. Why publish now?

Maybe it has nothing to do with vaccines but rather maintaining the BMJ brand ahead of some new fraud they know will come to light, or a warning to researchers who might publish elsewhere. Why publish and why publish now?

0. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-biden-facebook-soc...