The Lancet, a British peer-reviewed medical journal, was questioned many times in the last year for its endorsement of unscientific claims on behalf of big pharmaceutical companies. The medical journal has become more of an opinion magazine instead of a place for publishing peer-reviewed scientific research.
Recently, it published a hit job against the Modi government over the management of the pandemic. The journal published an editorial, in which it quoted The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, estimating that India will witness 1 million deaths and blamed this on Prime Minister Modi.
“If that outcome were to happen, Modi’s Government would be responsible for presiding over a self-inflicted national catastrophe,” reads the editorial written by Helena Wang, Asia Executive Editor at The Lancet.
Helena Wang, a close comrade of the Chinese Communist Party, has worked with The Lancet at its Beijing office since the medical journal opened its office in 2010 and was made Asia executive editor. She is also a Chinese council member of COPE (The Committee of Publishing Ethics), and, most importantly, she was a senior medical editor at People’s Medical Publishing House, a publishing house under the Chinese Ministry of Health between 2003 and 2007.
A look at Wang’s Linkedin profile would be enough to know about her actual credentials, affiliation and loyalty.
A person who has worked so closely with the Chinese government and is surviving in Beijing cannot do so without close affiliation and affection for the Chinese Communist Party.
However, the more important question is why The Lancet, the world’s most respected medical journal with an impact factor of 59, has appointed someone who worked for People’s Medical Publishing House (PMPH), a publisher of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), which modern medical community regards as “unscientific” as executive editor of its Asia team.
The Linkedin profile of PMPH reads, “PMPH has continually led the way in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) book publication throughout Asia. In the past 50 years, it has published a total of 2 000 TCM books, including 300 classical Chinese medical texts. Since 2006, PMPH has published more than 300 TCM titles of books, DVDs, and wall charts in English, Spanish, Italian, French and other languages. Today, PMPH is trying to publish more digital products.”
The credentials of The Lancet has deteriorated because it has become a business house working for profit, instead of medical science. A few months ago, it was forced to retract a study which claimed the use of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to treat the Covid-19 increased the mortality rate among patients, and publish a correction (read public apology).
Today, three of the authors have retracted "Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis" Read the Retraction notice and statement from The Lancet https://t.co/pPNCJ3nO8n pic.twitter.com/pB0FBj6EXr
— The Lancet (@TheLancet) June 4, 2020
“Today, three of the authors have retracted “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis” Read the Retraction notice and statement from The Lancet,” tweeted the Lancet with “correction” statement.
The Lancet claims to be a peer-reviewed journal, and such serious discrepancies found in its study means that either the study was not peer-reviewed or the organisation published it in exchange for some benefits.
@TheLancet's Asia editor is 'Helena Hui Wang', based in Beijing. It has published a low quality propaganda piece against the Indian Govt. The writing standard resembles a typical Indian journo. But I have to ask lancet & Ms Helena-How many articles on CCP China have you released?
— Joseph T Noony (@JoeAgneya) May 9, 2021
People on social media have already started questioning The Lancet and its Asia based editor. The journal has lost its reputation during the pandemic by publishing shoddy research and opinionated editorials from Chinese Communist Party stooges. If it wants to salvage its reputation, the journal must stop trading scientific enquiry for profits.