Indicting The Lancet on Iraq
Dean
A case for gross scientific incompetence. With more background here. (Via Glenn.)
I think it was made obvious what The Lancet's really about for quite some time, based on the hate-based lunatic rantings of one of its editors, Dr. Richard Horton:
The world of peer reviewed publications, especially high profile ones, is increasingly dominated, it appears, by political partisanship and economic self-interest.
Add to that the clearly fraudulent Sadr City and Nineveh numbers, and this whole study collapses like a house of cards.
It was always preposterous and transparent that a medical journal would get into the body-count business in a war zone.
Good rule of thumb: If scientists are extrapolating from small survey samples to generate large numbers of ANYTHING, they are almost always exaggerating and inflating numbers for either financial or political purposes.
HankB
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.