A Quick Note to Huffington Post

If Huffington Post wants to have credibility and gain its vaunted #1 spot as the most trusted online new source, there is only one thing it needs to do - ditch the woomeisters Chopra and RFK Jr., and get in their place some people from the reality-based community.

People are sick of conservative, emotion-based, gut-feeling decision-making that screwed up the country over the past 28 years. Why allowing the Left fringe equivalents into the mix? It is them that make a lot of people untrusting of Huffington Post.

Will Huffington Post publish and defend this piece about the potential fraud leading to all the autism-vaccine connection crappola?

This is your test. Do it, and perhaps you'll gain credibility with the reality-based community. Stick by your woomeisters instead, and your credibility is gone. Over. Out. Kaput.

(Hat-tip: Phil Plait)

Related:

Vaccines and autism--can we stick a fork in it now, please?
Why am I not surprised? It looks as though Andrew Wakefield probably falsified his data
Scientific Misconduct and the Autism-MMR Vaccine Link
Important Information on the MMR Vaccine-Autism Link
Anti-vax study a case of scientific fraud?
Was the original autism-vaccine data faked?

More like this

The author of the 1998 paper that fueld the anti-vaccination movement by asserting a link between MMR vaccinations and autism was recently found to have falsified his original data. The Sunday Times reports that the study's author Andrew Wakefield "changed and misreported results in his research"…
An investigation by the Sunday Times (UK) indicates that the doctor who reported information suggesting a link between MMR vaccine and autism may have "misreproted results in his research." The investigation purpots to show that ... ...Andrew Wakefield manipulated patients' data, which triggered…
My first big splash in the blogosphere will have occurred five years ago in June, when I first discovered the utter wingnuttery that is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. It was then that I wrote a little bit of that not-so-Respectful Insolence that you've come to know and love entitled Salon.com flushes its…
What does it take to get an advocate of pseudoscience to change his or her mind? Many are the times I've asked myself that question. Over the years, I've covered the gamut of techniques, going from what some might call "militant" or even insulting to being as reasoned and calm as can be--and…

The move in the first part of this century towards ratinalism, science, evidence and reason was called "modernism". I t was madernism that put man on the moon,m wiped out smallpox, and so on.

Of course, it had its deficiencies. Hence post-modernism.

But now, it seems, post-modernism's own glaring faults are becoming obvious (for instance: it turns out that re-hashing every bad idea from the past half aeon is dumb), and people are turning again to science, reason, and all that. But without quite the hubris and triumphalism of before.

Allow me to dub this: "neo-modernism".

I've done another round-up post -- who is saying what about the Deer articles on Wakefield in the London Times. I've included this post.

11 years on, Wakefield Manufactured Data showing MMR-Autism Link?

re HuffPo:

If they publish anything on the Wakefield affair subsequently by the Age of Autism crowd (Stagliano, Kirby, RFK jr,)-- or publish anything by that lot -- the HuffPo credibility is still shot.

And go read the comments at the HuffPo brief article linking to the Deer articles at the Times (London)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/08/doctor-andrew-wakefield-w_n_16…

Sample:

"Fact is, the government often lies to cover its own butt. The fact that the CDC is in the pocket of Big Pharma doesn't help, either. Opinions can easily be bought, especially in the mainstream media who rely on Pharma Advertising dollars.."