Howard: I have no position in GUMM, but I was wondering if you could answer a question for me.
I was having dinner with a couple of medical researcher friends, fairly high up on the food chain, and was telling them about the zicam study, and the nejm issue, and how nejm dragged their feet on reviewing/publishing the data, so they submitted it to someone else, a lesser journal.
my friends thought--and granted, this is strictly off the cuff, as they are not familiar with gumm--that if the data were really as good as gumm says they are--reducing the common cold by 85%--well, this kind of study, if well done, doesn't get the runaround. these data would be published, and quickly, and if not in the nejm, then at the very least in science (my friend didn't know about the nejm, but at science, if you paper is hot, you're accepted in a month or so).
so my question is:
is there a study flaw that caused the nejm or a more prestious journal to pass on it?
thanks for your insight.
kelly |
