TUCSON, Ariz., Dec. 13, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The COVID-19 pandemic has underlined the need for scientific integrity in the medical literature, but this is a concern in other controversial issues also, especially gun violence, writes Edgar A. Suter, M.D., in the winter issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Publicly funded studies published in high-profile journals, Suter notes, are tainted by flaws including exclusion of evidence that contradicts authors’ conclusions; the use of truncated homicide-rate data; failure to disclose advocacy activities of supposedly disinterested researchers; use of anonymous sources; and ignoring consequential variables such as race, socioeconomic status, and suicide substitution.
An August 2021 Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) editorial celebrated the end of the Dickey Amendment, which provided that “none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”
Suter states that the Dickey Amendment was enacted because of congressional testimony about alleged incompetence and overt mendacity of tax-funded research on guns, but actually did nothing to curtail the agenda-driven research.
Medical editors display lack of concern about research methodology, Suter states, quoting former New England Journal of Medicine editor-in-chief Jerome Kassirer as saying “no data are needed,” and that if current gun restrictions are ineffective, “we would be justified in supporting even more stringent restrictions.”
Dr. Suter concludes: “In highlighting the examples, we hope to encourage readers to recognize and editors to correct the problems. Let us aim to reduce all violence, not just gun violence.”
The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons is published by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), a national organization representing physicians in all specialties since 1943.
