Earlier this month, the United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a plan to decrease the problem of reputational bias in grant funding. I couldn’t help but contrast how hard the NIH tries to use the most rigorous scientific criteria to decide whose grants to fund with the conspiracy theory that Anthony Fauci personally doles out NIH dollars like a mob boss to scientists who support him.
Search: “peer review”
We found 444 results for your search.
A misinformation-laden review article in Cureus by prominent antivax activists that called for a moratorium on COVID vaccination has been retracted. What took so long, and how could such a paper been published in the peer-reviewed literature in the first place?
Share this:
In order portray COVID-19 vaccines as dangerous, Peter Doshi has now managed to get poorly designed and performed “reanalyses” of the clinical trial data used by the FDA to grant emergency use approval of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines published in two reputable journals, The BMJ and Vaccine? What happened?
Share this:
It’s depressing to see formerly respected academics spread lies about the NIH funding process in order to undermine trust in COVID-19 public health science.
Share this:
Cureus retracted a misinformation-packed paper. Now Steve Kirsch and its authors are threatening to sue for $250 million. Hilarity quickly ensued.
