1 Dec 2021 12:55 pm
No, the Evie article does not reference the article in the New England Journal of Medicine, only the article in the anti vax magazine by Thornley.freeman » 01 Dec 2021, 1:27 pm » wrote: ↑ This whole plandemic and Great Reset require preserving the narrative. He's not the first guy to get threatened with his job. Just did a quick search (even though this paper is irrelevant to the OP of this thread which is a study published in NEJM) and found what I expected:
https://weehingthong.org/2021/11/17/sim ... pregnancy/
"It follows an email from Professor Robert Scragg, the head of the School of Population Health at Auckland University, which urged Thornley and his co-author, Aleisha Brook, to “immediately publicly retract their article”. Such an intervention is almost unheard of in academia. Thornley told The Spinoff that he had issued a correction to the paper last week, but that “following the [Scragg] letter, I have decided to withdraw it”.
Why wouldn't he be allowed to correct it? Instead he withdrew it under pressure to keep his job. Same thing happens in our bureaucracies and academia whether regarding Pharma or climate.
So why don't you try actually reviewing the math about the NEJM paper of the original post?
It is common for Universities to have disciplinary actions when an academic has published a non peer reviewed paper that is shown to be false.
If he made a major mathematical error then the entire premise of the paper is incorrect.