Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine are the two most prestigious medical journals in the world.
It is therefore astounding that both of their chief editors publicly admitted that corruption destroys science.
Lancet Magazine Editor-in-Chief Richard Horton wrote:
Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply not be true. Overwhelmed with studies with small sample sizes, negligible effects, inaccurate search analyzes, and obvious conflicts of interest, coupled with an obsession with fashion trends of dubious importance, science has turned towards darkness. As one participant put it, "bad methods work." The Academy of Medical Sciences, the Medical Research Council, and the Biotechnology and Biotechnology Research Council now put their reputations ahead of investigating these questionable research practices. The apparent endemic nature [ie, prevalence within a scientific culture] of unacceptable exploratory behavior is alarming.
In their quest to tell a compelling story, scientists all too often fit the data into their desired picture of the world. Or adjust hypotheses to their data. Magazine editors also deserve the lion's share of criticism. We help and promote worse behaviors. Our tacit acceptance of influencers fuels unhealthy competition for winning spots in several selected magazines. Our love of “significance” poisons literature with many statistical tales. We reject important statements. Magazines are not the only intruders. Universities are embroiled in a constant struggle for money and talent, critical points that favor reductive techniques, such as an impressive publication. Government assessment procedures, such as ResearchExcellenceFramework, encourage unfair practices. And individual scholars, including their top management, do little to change the culture of research, which at times borders on malice.
About the same thing, in 2009, the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Marcia Angell, wrote:
It is simply no longer possible to believe most of the published clinical studies or to rely on the opinions of trusted doctors or reputable medical manuals. I do not enjoy this conclusion, which I slowly and reluctantly reached after working for twenty years as editor of the New England Medical Journal.
In a compulsory reading essay, Dr. Angell goes through by pharmacological companies, university medical faculties, as well as medical groups that establish criteria for diagnosis and treatment, describing them as mired in corruption and conflicts of interest.
Famous feminist and lesbian, professor Camila Paglia in the book “Vamps and tramps” writes:
“We need to know about the potentially damaging mix of gay activism with science, which generates more propaganda than truth. Gay scientists must be scientists first and foremost gay. ”
“Over the past decade, the situation has gotten out of control: reliable science is impossible when rational discourse is controlled by stormtroopers, in this case gay activists who, with fanatical absolutism, claim the exclusive possession of truth.”
Since scientific publications are mainly funded by states, international institutions, as well as other financial institutions, consider what goals they are guided by (quotes from Club of Rome report):
Richer countries have committed themselves to providing reproductive health and family planning services in accordance with the Cairo Action Plan of 1994, but neither national governments nor sponsors have yet fulfilled the promises made in Cairo. This means that about half a million women around the world still die during childbirth every year. Hundreds of millions of couples do not have access to contraception - a situation that the Catholic Church, until recently, helped to consolidate. ”
More: FERTILITY REDUCTION: Club of Rome, UN and Cairo Accords
“Nuchpop” activists behave similarly: spreading false information related to the promotion of homosexuality.
More: The myth of animal homosexuality is a political propaganda tool!
