By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
It's getting more common (in the US especially) for "scientists" and "practitioners" to sue any scientists who question the validity of their studies. It usually happens in cases where someone is selling something which is clearly woo or harmful but this is a much more serious case around the hydroxychloroquine study:
It's awful stuff and it needs to be sorted out. There shouldn't be any legal recourse to having your findings questioned under peer review, especially when done through a non-profit entity and the questioning scientist certainly shouldn't be open to abuse and threatening behaviour from the scientists being questioned.
SB
6
This is becoming a real problem on 09:11 - May 22 with 567 views
The irony of "blackmail and extortion". I don't understand how the charlatans could win, as surely questioning anything isn't libel? Bringing suits like this should carry punitive penalties.
Peer reviews can often be ridiculously vicious and mentally devastating so I am not surprised some people fight back, though if Bik was doxxed then the mental process of the jaded party is hard to side with.
This is becoming a real problem on 09:18 - May 22 by Mullet
The irony of "blackmail and extortion". I don't understand how the charlatans could win, as surely questioning anything isn't libel? Bringing suits like this should carry punitive penalties.
It's essentially the same as hotels attempting to sue guests who leave poor reviews on TripAdvisor. They're going for the "deliberately damaging our sales" angle, not actually defending the quality of their product.