Alleged fabrication of research findings by the U.S. administration cited in official statement
Loose Cannon: Unraveling the MAHA Report's Questionable Sources
Washington, D.C. - For a report aimed at improving child health, the "Make Our Children Healthy Again" (MAHA) report from the White House is swimming in controversy. An investigation by the online magazine "Notus," an offshoot of the Allbritton Journalism Institute, has uncovered seven non-existent sources cited in the MAHA report[1].
These phantom sources include scholars who allegedly didn't participate in the studies they're credited for, studies that aren't found in their respective journals, and researchers who seemingly don't exist[1]. It's like a game of broken telephone, and the message gets more distorted with each passing stage.
Here are a few revelations from this thorough investigation:
- Katherine Keyes, an epidemiologist, is listed as the lead author of a teen anxiety study in the MAHA report. However, Keyes wasn't involved in the actual study, and it's mysteriously absent from the journal "Jama Pediatrics"[1].
- The Virginia Commonwealth University boasts an author named Robert L. Findling on its faculty. But Findling hasn't conducted a study on advertising psychoactive substances to youth as claimed in the MAHA report, according to the university's response to "Notus"[1].
- The alleged lead author of an ADHD medication study, "Shah, M.B.," is a research riddle. There's no sign of this individual in any pertinent databases[1].
"Notus" reports that approximately 20 other sources have had their content twisted or results misrepresented. Numerous citation errors, broken links, and misinterpretations of study outcomes have been discovered, according to "Notus" and following investigations by The New York Times[1].
Dismissive Response from the White House
Faced with these damning allegations, the White House merely classified these issues as "minor citation and formatting errors." Emily Hilliard, a spokesperson for the Health and Human Services Department, contends that the MAHA report's validity remains intact[1]. However, the revised MAHA report has erased the seven references to these phantom sources[1].
Journalist Margaret Manto from "Notus" tells Spiegel that these aren't mere errors but serious gaffes. If the MAHA report had undergone a peer review, a process where independent experts evaluate scientific research before publication, it likely wouldn't have passed muster[1]. As it stands, that laundry list of debatable findings continues to stink.
[1] https://notusmag.com/white-house-report-cites-fake-scholars/[2] https://www.electionlawblog.org/2021/03/the-science-behind-hcrcs-long-term-care-and-covid-19-containing-costs-and-the-death-toll-is-not-an-innocent-inquiry.html
- The controversy surrounding the "Make Our Children Healthy Again" (MAHA) report from the White House extends to the realm of health-and-wellness and medical-conditions, as an investigation by "Notus" magazine uncovered seven non-existent sources cited in the report.
- In the realm of politics, the White House has dismissed the damning allegations against the MAHA report, categorizing them as "minor citation and formatting errors." Yet, journalist Margaret Manto from "Notus" argues that these aren't mere errors but serious gaffes, suggesting that the report's questionable sources would likely not have passed a peer review process.
- Beyond the specific MAHA report, these findings underscore the importance of scientific rigor and transparency in all realms, including science and general-news, emphasizing the need for thorough investigation and fact-checking to maintain credibility and public trust.
