Cheraw Chronicle

Complete News World

Japanese Cancer Study Retracted – Collective Physicians Foundation

Japanese Cancer Study Retracted – Collective Physicians Foundation

A study by a Japanese research group that reported that deaths from certain types of cancer increased in Japan in 2021 and 2022 compared to a downward trend for several years (1) has been retracted by the editors of the scientific journal Cureus (2).

In what was formerly called an “expression of concern” (in scientific publications, an “expression of concern” is a notice from a publisher against a particular publication, warning that it may contain errors or be unreliable in any way, ed.) it stated the following:

“The editors have been made aware of several concerns regarding the scientific credibility of this article.”

The main inspiration for this withdrawal appears to have been incorrect fact checking. From Reuters News AgencyThis fact check is incorrect because facts were checked that were not described at all in the post. [https://note.com/kochidoctors459/n/nbeb8fc5c36cc] (3). This fact checker failed to disclose any (apparent) conflict of interest (4).

The sole reason for this withdrawal is now described as follows:

“After post-publication review, it was determined that the relationship between mortality rates and vaccination status could not be demonstrated by the data presented in this article.” :“After post-publication review, it was determined that the relationship between mortality rates and vaccination status could not be demonstrated by the data presented in this article.”

This reason for withdrawal is illogical for two reasons. First, the journal did not ask for this evidence, and second, we have known since Karl Popper that scientific theories can never be “proved,” only “refuted.” By this argument, all related or experimental publications in Cureus should be withdrawn.

See also  Beautiful Eye Catcher: Tips to make your eyes and the skin around them shine

Cureus editors also do not provide a review report on which to base their decision. Authors therefore differ. This withdrawal and wrote a wide-ranging “refutation”. (Rebuttal, a form of evidence presented to contradict or invalidate other evidence presented by the opposing party, ed.) (3). The opinions of the original reviewers who previously accepted the article would be a welcome addition to this re-review.

A full description of the deployment and withdrawal process could in itself become a valuable and interesting academic study, which could still have a “happy ending” if the withdrawal is reversed.

a Japanese version of this publication in the Japanese medical journal Medical Journal Rinsho Hyoka (Clinical Evaluation) Appeared on July 1, 2024, and will add the above evaluation to Article (4).

References

  1. Gibo M, Kojima S, Fujisawa A, et al. (08 April 2024) Age-specific increased cancer mortality after the third mRNA-Lipid nanoparticle vaccine dose during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Cureus 16(4): e57860. doi:10.7759/cureus.57860.
  2. Gibo M, Kojima S, Fujisawa A, et al. (26 June 2024) Regression: increased cancer mortality after the third dose of mRNA lipid nanoparticle vaccine during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Cureus 16(6): p143. doi:10.7759/cureus.r143.
  3. Gibo M, Kojima S, Fujisawa A, et al. Response to Notice of Intent to Withdraw_doi_10.7759cureus.57860 https://note.com/kochidoctors459/n/nbeb8fc5c36ccs
  4. Kampf, J. (2022). Fact-checkers should declare conflicts of interest. BMJ 2022;376 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o399 (Published 21 February 2022) Cite this as: BMJ 2022;376:o399
  5. Clean Rating 52(1)2024.

Support us, be a friend!
Do you find Artsen Collectief articles valuable? Then become a friend. It’s free! As a friend, you will receive our monthly newsletter, can make suggestions to our editorial team and will be kept informed of all developments!
Together we stand stronger. From fear to confidence!

Disclaimer: The Doctors Group is not responsible for the content of external pages mentioned and referenced. Sharing a page does not mean that The Doctors Group shares all views. The Doctors Group supports the collection and unsupervised sharing of (medical) information to stimulate open conversation/scientific discussion.