Deep link provided by Cite BiteClose this shade
Source: http://www.iq.harvard.edu/blog/sss/archives/2006/10/removed_a_case.shtml
Deep link provided by Cite Bite| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 |
« Meta-analysis: To Trust or Not to Trust | Main
18 October 2006
Amy Perfors
David Kane's most recent guest post about the Lancet study has been removed. Since this is not a normal practice for us, explanations for why (and why we posted it in the first place) are below the fold.
Why remove it? The tone is unacceptable, the facts are shoddy, and the ideas are not endorsed by myself, the other authors on the sidebar, or the Harvard IQSS.
Why post it in the first place, given this? Here I admit to an error in judgment on my part. I see my job as head of the Author's Committee as doing the somewhat mundane and boring tasks of coordinating and inspiring our posters, not exercising editorial control. I was uncomfortable with the post even before putting it up, but I also hate censorship, and -- since I don't know this field or this study very well -- I couldn't say with complete confidence that my discomfort was totally justified. I decided to err on the side of expressing something I was uncomfortable with, rather than stifling it. Again, that was probably an error with regards to this post, and I apologize. It was not up to the standards we aspire to here, and does not reflect our views.
Posted by Amy Perfors at October 18, 2006 03:45 PM
