Wed, Jun-23-21, 09:48
|
 |
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25,659
|
|
Plan: Primal/P:E
Stats: 171/145/145
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
|
|
Of note: the same prof. Hu went after Nina Teicholz's 2015 BMJ paper criticizing the USDG review process. (Found via April Harding on twitter)
Quote:
CSPI in particular opposes new thinking on saturated fat, presumably because the group has campaigned against these fats for decades and indeed, is uniquely responsible for driving them out of the food supply. Yet these fats have undergone considerable reconsideration over the past five years [There are many articles on this, in mainstream publications]. In her BMJ piece, Teicholz argued that this recent science had not been systematically reviewed by the 2015 DGA committee.
CSPI wrote the letter of retraction submitted to The BMJ and collected signatures from 180+ scientists, including all members of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory committee. This is virtually an unprecedented number of scientists (?) calling for retraction of an article [and is therefore arguably a subject that RW ought to address]. The original number of signers was actually higher, but 18 dropped out. Harvard professor Frank Hu made a particular effort to round up signatures. He is the DGA committee member who chaired the 2015 DGA review of saturated fats that Teicholz criticized.
It’s not clear whether the 180+ scientists understood the alleged errors that formed the foundation of the BMJ retraction request, as reporter Ian Leslie reported in The Guardian: “When I asked them to name just one of the supposed errors in it [the BMJ article], not one of them was able to. One admitted he had not read it.”
|
(bold mine) (From https://shootingthemessenger.blog/tag/retraction-watch/ ) |