Impact factors, Colossus and the Wakefield retraction.

(Graphs from The Independent (London), 21 June 2008)

Today was one of those days where lots of interesting stuff turns up. On the BBC, there was 2 very good pieces about the flaws in the scientific process, specifically closed peer review and impact factors.

I also notice that the BBC are running a daily piece about the history of computing in the UK this week, parts one and two have already been published. Today’s article about Colossus is especially good.

Also, after last week’s excellent, and damning, judgement from the GMC -

- regarding Andrew Wakefield’s reprehensible behaviour in his research into the ‘link’ between MMR and autism, today The Lancet finally pulled the paper in which his findings were published 12 years ago. Wakefield et al (1998) (doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11096-0) has now been retracted from the public record after the Lancet concluded that the claims made by the researchers were ‘false’ (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2810%2960175-7/fulltext – apologies for paywall).

Posted via email from Simon’s posterous

Share and Enjoy:
  • FriendFeed
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Posterous
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Slashdot
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • connotea
  • email
  • MySpace
  • Ping.fm
  • Reddit

Tags: , ,

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010 news, science

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

Additional comments powered by BackType

Search

 

Twitter Updates

Posting tweet...

Powered by Twitter Tools

ResearchBlogging.org

Blog Stats

Visits today: 55
Total Visits: 5952

flickr

Apoptosis Network (alternate) Apoptosis Network North Lakes, Feb '10 North Lakes, Feb '10 North Lakes, Feb '10 North Lakes, Feb '10 P7250186 P7250166 P7250160 P7250094

Categories