Was it any surprise that the journal that published the recent Hewitson stinker did so? Not really. Straight from the opening lines of the Editorial the direction this journals ‘science’ would take was clear:
This issue of Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis is fully devoted to the issues of autism. The idea for this topic came from Professor Dorota Majewska…
Did it indeed? I wonder if this is the same Professor Dorota Majewska who has signed her name at We Support Andy Wakefield? I’m not sure how common this name is but it would be a monumental coincedence if they weren’t one and the same person.
Getting back to the Editorial, we see some familar names from the outliers of scientific credibility – Hitlan, DeSoto, Geier – that give pause to the peer review process this journal makes its papers undertake. Are they aware of how little regard these names and their associated ‘science’ is held in in more prestigious journals and law courts?
The Editor discusses the Hewitson paper thusly:
An alarming finding is reported by Hewitson and coworkers (Ref. 4), showing that, in infant monkeys that were immunized, the amygdala does not show the normal pattern of maturation but is hypertrophied. Although these are only preliminary data, given the well-known role of the amygdala in generation of fear and other negative emotions, they support the possibility that there is a link between early immunization and the etiology of autism
How is it that an Editor and his peer review team missed that which LB/RB’s own Sullivan caught immediately? That according to this ‘alarming’ paper, pieces of the control subjects brains apparently shrank during the course of the experiment. That would certainly be an alarming result – if it were in any way true. How could it be accounted for? Too few animals in the control group or maybe just bad maths. Either way, to describe this paper as alarming might be accurate – but not necessarily for the reason that the Editor obviously feels.
They also seemed to miss Sullivan’s other finding – that two of the subjects just disappeared from the paper. To quote Sullivan:
Weren’t there 4 monkeys in the control group and 12 monkeys in the vaccinated group? What happened to the other 2 of the control subjects?