Study authors stand firm against editor-in-chief's attempts at retrospectively altering their results and the study objective.

Last Friday, the same day Facebook slapped a disinformation stamp on references to the widely distributed Cochrane mask review, Cochrane editor-in-chief issued a statement downplaying the results, to the point of making an incorrect claim about the objective of the report. The same day report lead author Dr. Tom Jefferson was attacked in a New York Times opinion piece, which claimed that despite the evidence, masks reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.

I published a critical review of the piece referred to in the Facebook fact-check last Sunday, which was republished by the Daily Sceptic and Brownstone Institute the day after. In short, it was my conclusion that this so-called “fact-check” was totally worthless, both factually, logically and ethically.

Today, Tom Jefferson sent a complaint to the New York Times pointing out a potential conflict of interest of the author of the opinion piece.

Maryanne Demasi, who interviewed Jefferson shortly after the publication of the review, provides further detail on the matter today. She explains, quoting Jefferson, how the authors were given only a short notice before the editor-in-chief published her statement, and no information on its contents.

Subscribe

Demasi says the authors have already convened and will complain to the leadership of Cochrane. Quoting her article:

“We are the copyright holders of the review, so we decide what goes in or out of the review.  We do not change our reviews on the basis of what the media wants,” said Jefferson on behalf of the authors.

In her article, Demasi provides further detail on the background, a prior example of a similar chain of events, and on the current financial uncertainties Cochrane now deals with.

This article was originally published by From Symptoms to Causes and is republished here with permission