Today the respected British medical journal, The Lancet issued a retraction of Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 study that links measles vaccines to autism and caused so many parents to put their children at risk by NOT getting them vaccinated.
As Forbes reporter Matthew Herper points out in his blog, the language of the retraction that The Lancet issued was so obtuse that non-medical folks would have a hard time understanding what really happened. In his article, he suggests some better, clearer language because the anti-vaccine folks are very clear in their statements.
Is this an example of scientific wonks who simply can not speak clearly or is it more an example of an embarrassed group of editors trying to do what they need to do and get on with it? No wonder there is so little trust anymore when the very institutions and people that are supposed to be credible and honest, are not. If we can’t communicate clearly, then ALL perspectives are not part of the conversation and that can be dangerous.
What do you think?
