Leigh Silvester on Nostr: npub1shw9y…jaesf npub1g0tuf…3tvm4 Andrew Wakefield has a lot to answer for, ...
npub1shw9yn8j44v9h8y3f3czfrpr9q9d5750jlf5xgxljkjhwr508wjsejaesf (npub1shw…aesf) npub1g0tuf634rz4suczwj7kgnecr6cyt0eu9xmp3sp0fku68mqehq4msp3tvm4 (npub1g0t…tvm4)
Andrew Wakefield has a lot to answer for, although I cannot understand how The Lancet thought his work was acceptable to publish in the first place.
He held a patent to a rival vaccine at the time, also he had a very limited publication history so there was more reason for the paper to have been rigorously peer reviewed, which would have quickly highlighted the lamentable quality of the manuscript.
Andrew Wakefield has a lot to answer for, although I cannot understand how The Lancet thought his work was acceptable to publish in the first place.
He held a patent to a rival vaccine at the time, also he had a very limited publication history so there was more reason for the paper to have been rigorously peer reviewed, which would have quickly highlighted the lamentable quality of the manuscript.