Weekend reads: Study claiming masks harm is retracted; papers lead to high treason charges; paying to publish in fake journals

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work?

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to more than 300. There are now 40,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNoteLibKeyPapers, and Zotero. The Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker now contains 200 titles. And have you seen our leaderboard of authors with the most retractions lately — or our list of top 10 most highly cited retracted papers?

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at team@retractionwatch.com.

3 thoughts on “Weekend reads: Study claiming masks harm is retracted; papers lead to high treason charges; paying to publish in fake journals”

  1. A study that claimed masks harm is retracted. – “(…) the article does not meet the standards of editorial and scientific soundness for Frontiers in Public Health (…)”

    That is an interesting case, as the last author, Andreas Sönnichsen, is also past president 2019-21 of the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine (Deutsches Netzwerk für EbM, DNEbM), a respected scientific medical society in Germany that describes itself as the “German-speaking competence and reference center for all aspects of evidence-based medicine”. (https://www.ebm-netzwerk.de/de/ueber-uns/chronik)

    1. Almost as if he didn’t consider the existing evidence from other fields where the evidence for the effectiveness of mask use has long been proven. This is a mistake that is often made by people putting RCTs at the top of the pyramid of evidence as if they override all other kinds of evidence, rather than realising that they must have a foundation of basic science. See positive trials of homeopathy!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.