Online

Feb 15, 2012

Ian Hickie: on Twitter, The Lancet and my critics

It’s not uncommon in my world to be engaged in very lively academic debates, like the risk versus benefits associated with new antidepressant drugs, writes Professor Ian Hickie.

It’s not uncommon in my world to be engaged in very lively academic debates, like the risk versus benefits associated with new antidepressant drugs.  Similarly, I have been widely attacked by a variety of vested health interests, particularly when I have argued for the clear cost-benefits associated with the range of new health initiatives.

22 comments

Leave a comment

22 thoughts on “Ian Hickie: on Twitter, The Lancet and my critics

  1. ravenm

    Re Prof. Hickie’s statement above that ‘The Lancet itself has just republished the same academic conclusion’ about agomelatine, this is the full extent of the discussion of agomelatine in the article (which unfortunately is behind a paywall):
    Another advance is the introduction of agomelatine—a melatonin (MT1 and MT2) agonist and a 5-HT2C-receptor antagonist. Agomelatine has shown a generally favourable tolerability and efficacy, therefore providing a promising alternative for patients who do not respond to existing pharmacotherapies, or who cannot tolerate their side-effects.130 Placebo-controlled research provides evidence for the effectiveness of agomelatine as both an acute and a continuation treatment for major depression.131–133 (Kupfer et al. 2011) http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(11)60602-8/abstract
    One author ‘serves on an advisory board for Servier’.
    Doesn’t hold much weight compared with the letters published in response to Hickie & Rogers’ review http://www.thelancet.com/search/results?searchTerm=ian+hickie&fieldName=AllFields&journalFromWhichSearchStarted=lancet

  2. drjgelb

    Something’s rotten in the State of The Lancet, Ian, when its editor loudly & tactlessly pays out on all the organisations, institutions, people, nations & colleagues he hates. His Twitter feed would qualify for a referral to AHPRA if it belonged to an Australian health practitioner. I’ve seen some of his correspondence to respected clinicians & the same arrogant & mocking attitude is readily apparent. His recent Tweet, expressing “joy” at The Lancet being the subject of a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission, is typical of the contempt evident in his correspondence with potential Lancet contributors.

    I was particularly incensed by the ignorant & historically inaccurate claims contained in Horton’s numerous Tweets supporting Palestinians & denigrating Israel & Zionism. Jews have never been fooled by anti-semites hiding behind the anti-Zionism label….the rhetoric is remarkably similar & the lies equally outrageous. If he cannot be bothered to check the historical record on the origins of the Palestinian refugee issue & the circumstances involved in Israel’s birth, then evidence based medicine must be just so much politically correct jargon. That boycott you mentioned, sounds like a very reasonable response to Horton’s self-entitled nastiness.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...