Recently, the paper that claimed hydroxychloroquin was an effective treatment for COVID-19 was FINALLY retracted, 4.5 years AFTER its publication in a supposedly professional science journal published by Elsevier. It was supposedly peer-reviewed... only 36 hours after submission. And who's the owner of the journal? The author of the paper himself, Jean-Marc Lorain. The paper was IMMEDIATELY questioned after its publication, as its timeline made no sense. For the timeline to work, the author must have started the study BEFORE its ethics rules had been approved! Further more, a study only a year later got the exact opposite result: Use of HCQ lead to INCREASED mortality. Yet the paper remain published with no retraction. In fact, one of the co-authors (the rest requested their names to be removed from the paper) tried to sue the critic. That is, until 4.5 years later... when it was FINALLY retracted.
This paper was cited by bajillion COVID deniers claiming government were withholding "vital medicine" from the public, which also included horse dewormer ivermectin. People were so desperate for ivermectin (which also had NO effect on COVID-19) they were robbing pet stores and veterinary clinics. What they don't tell you is these COVID denier doctors are actually selling Ivermectric and Hydroxychloroquin on the side and making BIG BUCKS... until exposed by a hacker.
The only bad and unethical science in recent memory that surpassed this was Andrew Wakefield's bogus vaccine link to autism study. Not only was the data unethically sourced, Wakefield did not disclose he was developing a vaccine himself. THAT paper in the Lancet took a DECADE to be retracted.
Just because it's published in a journal doesn't mean it's reliable and good science.
No comments:
Post a Comment