Was JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine DeAngelis even thinking when she deliberately berated a concerned scientist to the WSJ? In response to a letter published by Dr. Jonathan Leo in BMJ questioning the conflict of interest by authors of a recent JAMA study, Dr. DeAngelis called Dr. Leo a “nobody” and a “nothing”. Of course, the authors of said study subsequently apologized for not disclosing the potential conflicts. The funny part is that both Dr. DeAngelis and JAMA have typically held very high standards when it has come to financial disclosure. Why the “playground threatening” in this case?? What “conflict of interest” was JAMA protecting?? Since nobody ever truly comes clean in these types of situations and proceeds to cover as much of the ugly stuff ASAP, I don’t think we’ll ever know.
-
Nothing's Shocking by Noah Gray
Neuroscience isn't exactly rocket science; it's more like brain surgery. A little of everything here, as I am easily distracted. Opinions on this blog reflect my thoughts alone. Follow the madness on Twitter - @noahWG
-
The kind of thing that gives editors a bad name.
- Date:
- Monday, 16 Mar ch 2009 - 21:48 UTC
Last updated: Monday, 16 Mar 2009 - 21:48 UTC
-
Comments
-
Update on this situation: Of course, the JAMA editors deny ever saying anything printed by the WSJ_. Keep digging that hole….(full report herec.html).
Another update, now a patient advocacy group is calling for the AMA to investigate and suspend the two editors who perpetrated this bizarre and thuggish behavior. I can’t believe this is not getting more attention!