An update on the fall-out from the special issue of the journal Homeopathy that was devoted to the 'memory of water'. This was written about extensively by me and many others, and in the end there was so much annoyance at what Philip Ball called an 'intellectual shambles' that a number of people have submitted letters to the journal's editor.
This morning I heard that my comments on Martin F Chaplin's article have been accepted for publication. The letter critiquing the Rao et al. paper that was jointly drafted by contributors to the JREF forums (I'm the third author) has also been accepted. Both should appear in the January issue of Homeopathy. So, to give the journal its due, it has not shied away from robust debate. This has doubled my publication record overnight, but I'm not sure if I should include these on my CV...
I expect that the authors of the original articles will have a reply published in the same issue. It will be interesting to see what they have to say.
Incidentally, an erratum to the Rao et al. paper has been published in the latest issue of Homeopathy. It deals with a referencing mistake, and is really the least of the problems with the paper, but it's something.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Nice work water-boy. Respect.
Congrats. I'm similarly conflicted.
Cheers!
Here's apgaylard's blog entry on this.
Some time ago I checked at the ISI web of Knowledge to see what the Impact Factor of Homeopathy might be. Homeopathy is not listed, but the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine had an Impact Factor of 1.104. See here.
Incidentally, I tend to think that impact factors are all bollocks. Which makes it especially annoying that scientists seem to rely on them so much.
Post a Comment