A Critical Evaluation of 'Study Laundering: IPAK, Antivax Scientists, and the Return of Living Dead Antivax Studies' reveals likely bias, deceit high likelihood of intentional libelous defamation.
Thanks for posting this review and analysis of Gorski's blog post. The comments section is amazing on how far the readers are willing to go along with the malignement and straw-man building to support their own biases, IMO. Biased, indeed.
Gorksi has a first amendment right to say what he wants and post it on his blog, but when harm can be proven (libel and slander), the Common Law principle of Do No Harm has to be considered. Had Dr. Gorski assumed less and researched more on the subject (and applied his scientific training to reduce bias), the post would have generated a constructive debate versus the name calling that we see in it.
I am still floored that he uses the term "anti-vaxxer". That term is the equivalent of "conspiracy theorist". The pejorative is there to stop discussion and increase the emotional tone. As a member of the IPAK editorial board, I am proud to serve in this capacity.
Gorski sure did take an awful lot of time to write this libelous article. Hm. Why would he do that? I see the blog is supported by The New England Skeptical Society, a group of "very smarts" who think doctors who prescribe vitamins are quacks.
Thanks for posting this review and analysis of Gorski's blog post. The comments section is amazing on how far the readers are willing to go along with the malignement and straw-man building to support their own biases, IMO. Biased, indeed.
Gorksi has a first amendment right to say what he wants and post it on his blog, but when harm can be proven (libel and slander), the Common Law principle of Do No Harm has to be considered. Had Dr. Gorski assumed less and researched more on the subject (and applied his scientific training to reduce bias), the post would have generated a constructive debate versus the name calling that we see in it.
I am still floored that he uses the term "anti-vaxxer". That term is the equivalent of "conspiracy theorist". The pejorative is there to stop discussion and increase the emotional tone. As a member of the IPAK editorial board, I am proud to serve in this capacity.
Gorski sure did take an awful lot of time to write this libelous article. Hm. Why would he do that? I see the blog is supported by The New England Skeptical Society, a group of "very smarts" who think doctors who prescribe vitamins are quacks.
I have yet to read anythng from Mr Gorski that in any way benefits me. Invariably, I feel uncomfotable, disappointed and, ultimately, sullied.
I imagine Mr Gorski is being used but is too occupied to realise it.