Recall that really, really awful paper that was published about genetically modified maize, Monsanto and Round-up weed killer? You know, the unethical one with the tumor-laden rats which was eventually retracted?
Well, here is another example of YOU CAN GET ANYTHING PUBISHED. It’s been published in another journal. It includes a new analysis.
Retraction Watch learned yesterday, however, that Environmental Sciences Europe — a journal where Seralini has published before — was the journal publishing the new version. The journal, part of SpringerOpen, is too young to have an official Impact Factor (IF). Using the same calculation, however, the journal would have an IF of .55. That would place it about 190th out of the 210 journals in the “environmental sciences” category at Thomson Scientific. (For comparison, Food and Chemical Toxicology has an IF of just above 3, and a ranking of 27th.)
This is hardly the first time that the authors of a retracted paper have republished it. In a recent case, they did so in the same journal. But in a more typical case, they republished the work in another journal, with a lower IF.
The republished study was peer-reviewed, according to the press materials, and Seralini confirmed that it was in an email to Retraction Watch.
The authors of the study did not declare that there is a book and film about the incident in their disclosure. The study mentions tumors but not cancer, though cancer was used in media ploys.
Scummy “science” got even scummier.
UPDATE: (27-Jun-2014) The editor of the new journal admitted that it was not peer-reviewed by his reviewers since that was already done the first time. Lame. Seralini is still saying it was. This study is just horrendous. As noted at Neurologica, this is a small, poor study that is politically motivated – most insidious stuff.