Add new comment

Comment: 

The last paragraph says:
 
<blockquote;
We are concerned that the extraordinary rapidity with which this particular manuscript was reviewed was a contributing factor in the issues raised here. That is, each <em;Addiction</em; Research Report provides the date of manuscript submission as well as the date of completion of initial review. The span between these two dates for this paper was 11 days, whereas the mean for every other Research Report published in Vol. 110 (2015) of <em;Addiction</em; (issues 1–6, excluding Supplement 1) was 87 days, with a range of 42–342 days (<em;n =</em; 61; standard deviation = 46). How was this paper, and no other in 2015, ushered through the review process so quickly? Interestingly, <em;Addiction</em; \Editor-in-Chief Dr Robert West has asserted publically that ‘E-cigarettes are about as safe as you can get… E-cigarettes are probably about as safe as drinking coffee’ [<a class="link__reference js-link__reference" href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.13066/full#add13066-bib-0... rel="#add13066-bib-0009" title="Link to bibliographic citation";9]. These statements suggest a potential conflict of conscience [<a class="link__reference js-link__reference" href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.13066/full#add13066-bib-0... rel="#add13066-bib-0010" title="Link to bibliographic citation";10] in the handling of a flawed report that reinforces Dr West's professed faith in e-cigarette safety, although of course we do not know the extent to which that potential conflict played a role in this case.
</blockquote;
&nbsp;
This is certainly consistent with my experience in dealing with <em;Addiction, </em;which only would consider publishing the paper Maggie Kulik and I wrote documenting the fact that the alleged "hard core" of smokers is melting away as smoking prevelance drops (i,e, the remaining population of smokers is softenining not hardening).&nbsp; We ended up withdrawing the paper and publishing it in <em;https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26108654" target="_blank";Tobacco Control.</em;
&nbsp;
Then, astonishingly, <em;Addiction </em;published a paper trashing our findings and https://tobacco.ucsf.edu/addiction-refuses-allow-discussion-industry-tie... not allow us to talk about the industry connections of the authors in our response.
&nbsp;
This consistent pattern is why I don't even send papers to <em;Addiction </em;and generally don't ttust anything they publish on e-cigarettes or har reduction.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.