From vaping to global warming to COVID — when science goes left
/
MIT weighs in
“Last year, the Journal of the American Heart Association published a study finding that vaping posed as great a heart risk as smoking does. According to Wesley Smith, that study fueled public policies that stifled the industry, damaging or destroying many small businesses and denying smokers the leading alternative to cigarettes.
But now, the study in question has been been retracted. The editors are “concerned that the study conclusion is unreliable” due to what appears to have been an uncompleted peer review process.
….
Yet, the study was published anyway.
Anyone can make a mistake. However, publishing an article even though the questions of reviewers have not been addressed seems like more than just a mistake.
. . .[S]cience journals have grown increasingly ideological. Nature has endorsed Joe Biden for president and promised to publish more political science — which isn’t “science” at all. The New England Journal of Medicineshould change its name to the New Ideology Journal of Medicine. Science has endorsed “nature rights.” The list goes on and on.
It’s enough to make you wonder whether establishment science follows the data wherever it leads or, instead, is often influenced by political and social agendas. And once you wonder about that, you really shouldn’t blindly “follow the science” — or at least “science” produced after the left’s march through our institutions reached the scientific establishment.”
