Our friends at Retraction Watch also happened to notice the earlier case out of the MD Anderson Cancer Center research pollution issue. RW also makes note recently that even reputable science peer review journals may take up to a year, if ever, in retracting a published study when even the university principle investigators (PIs in the research community's parlance) formally request retractions of their own research study due to error they found in their own work and duly tried to report. That's because some research journals regard retractions as toxic to their business model (of making money, as publishers). Beware. You cannot afford to just believe blindly. Apparently the risk is real that the command Chinese government is forcing politics into its research process, at least that which it now apparently strategically shares with the international community.
A reminder to all that everything is subject to a grain of salt, and a Missouri "show me" attitude that is the standard of any real peer reviewed science must always prevail in the minds of anyone who consumes research; much less of course than for anything anyone ever claims without offering critical proof, whether the claim is "scientific" or not (example of unscientific: any opinion). As the saying goes, "Fools rush in..." We are all at risk when real science is compromised.
Written by
MarionP
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
"Infamous OxyContin-maker Purdue Pharma used front organizations and sponsored research to deceive the World Health Organization and corrupt global public health policies with the goal of boosting international opioid sales and profits, according to a Congressional report(PDF) released Thursday, May 22.
"The investigation identified two WHO guidance documents that appear to parrot some of Purdue's misleading and outright false marketing claims about the safety and efficacy of their highly addictive opioids.
"The findings, released by Reps. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), land as the country is still grappling with an epidemic of opioid abuse and overdoses. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, opioid overdoses kill an average of 130 Americans every day."
I'm sure you are right, capitalist pharmaceuticals was what the topic was. Or was it?
There is a three year pattern here. Science does not do this lightly and neither does RW. So many have been just putting them out while withholding base data and keeping it closed off, I'm just calling the tail end of a multi-year pattern broadly, when later review leads the publisher to ask for base data, the experimenters refuse. See, in science, the ethics game is all or none. Violate any one single piece of it calls it all into question, in the collective mind of the science community, it is built into the ethics standards exactly that way and intentionally. So a violation of A means the scientists are required to doubt fidelity all the way to Z, until demonstrated otherwise. Maybe that's just an insider thing to know.
Not looking to convince anyone, it is your responsibility to become curious enough to see for yourself if there is something to it or not. You are free to ignore or dismiss as you will; if you wish to, please do so. I don't debate. Decide as you will. Ethics violations generally reveal far more once you dig, that is the point of the piece and the message recent watchers will know to get. Any scientist will see that, it's why the piece was published in the first place. I know you all hate to have anything dash desperate hopes, or have your own sacred cows to grind, whatever, and will discount anything. My own parents, both scientists, even went to faith healers in the end. Didn't help of course. All very human. But the politics coming out of PRC are real. It's why the scientists mentioned that they were Chinese-American...because of the connections they found. The connections may be very subtle but all too real. Science doesn't use the race or culture card lightly, they are plenty plugged into the real world of consequences for doing so without evidence.
Guess we all have our pet blind spots.
But what if the topic was about explosive characteristics of vehicle airbags, or the quality and quantity and safety and efficacy of natural remedies that don't have to go through FDA standards before being allowed in the marketplace?
No, I was just talking about what I think is the newest group to the party. Sadly.
I have worked with many Chinese people over the course of my career. I found every one of them to be intelligent, hard-working, and highly ethical. There is a word for your singling out the Chinese for opprobrium - and that word is: racist.
You still don't get it, do you. It's not the people, my spouse is Chinese in fact. It's the government and its reach. Talk about an intentional slow learner to international politics. I tire of your intentional effort to be just oppositional just to be argumentative, or be the one who is "right." Jeez.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
High uric acid diet for PD?
Parkinsons and altitude
Whole Body Vibration 
Medication induced dementia
Mannitol and sense of Taste/Smell
