4 ms·

How about these? https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/1267804020887912448 https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/126780402088791244... "This is Americ

How about these? https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/1267804020887912448 https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/126780402088791244... "This is America?" https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/1267725790633955328 https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/126772579063395532... "It says something about the state of global political leadership that Gordon Brown must remind Presidents and Prime Ministers of their duties. The world needs international action now." https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/1266459513248534529 https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/126645951324853452... "Tony Fauci and Debbie Birx—You have to resign. You can’t lend your credibility to a President who is doing frightening violence to a system of international cooperation you have spent your lives working to protect and strengthen. Please resign now. Don’t support this President." And, of course, https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/1267504177158262785 https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/126750417715826278... "Whatever one’s views about this government, public trust is essential for public health. Was protecting Dominic Cummings really worth it?" Public trust is essential for public health, indeed.

DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
The editor of The Lancet is allowed to have political opinions, and to express them. Most of the opinions (with the exception of the tweet from two days ago) are about health policy. It makes sense that the editor of The Lancet is upset about Trump's attempt to wreck the WHO, for example. If the editor of The Lancet can't speak up about that, what can they speak up about?
- thu2111 6y ago
  Of course they're allowed to have opinions and express them. We're then allowed to observe that their work is likely highly biased as a result.
  - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
    If you think being in favor of international health cooperation and being against censorship of scientific terms from CDC publications makes a journal editor "highly biased," that's your prerogative.

DiogenesKynikos 6y ago

The editor of The Lancet is allowed to have political opinions, and to express them. Most of the opinions (with the exception of the tweet from two days ago) are about health policy. It makes sense that the editor of The Lancet is upset about Trump's attempt to wreck the WHO, for example. If the editor of The Lancet can't speak up about that, what can they speak up about?

thu2111 6y ago
Of course they're allowed to have opinions and express them. We're then allowed to observe that their work is likely highly biased as a result.
- DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
  If you think being in favor of international health cooperation and being against censorship of scientific terms from CDC publications makes a journal editor "highly biased," that's your prerogative.