2 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2018
    1. On 2017 Sep 07, Donald Forsdyke commented:

      REFERENCE WITHDRAWN

      Reference 7 in this paper (de Oliveira MF, 2011) has been retracted by the Editors Human Neuroscience Editorial Office., 2016. The discovery of the problem was made in 2015 by Ondrej Havlicek and announced in the Neurosceptic section of Discover Magazine Here, which was reviewing one of my papers on the topic. In an End-Note (Oct 2012) to an earlier paper on my web-pages Forsdyke DR, 2009 Here, I had juxtaposed the figure of Feuillet et al. (2007) with the one from the paper of Oliviera et al. (2011). With hindsight, it is easy to see that the photographs for the patient of Feuillet et al. are reproduced in Oliviera et al., without appropriate acknowledgement.

      .<br> However, the fact that the third repetition of an observation does not withstand scrutiny, in no way implies a similar problem with the first two reports, one by Lorber, and one by Oliviera et al. (2007). While many, like myself, remain sceptical, we await further independent reports (such as that provided by Rosie Raveis in the Neurosceptic blog), and post-mortem verifications of the patients described in the first two reports.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

  2. Feb 2018
    1. On 2017 Sep 07, Donald Forsdyke commented:

      REFERENCE WITHDRAWN

      Reference 7 in this paper (de Oliveira MF, 2011) has been retracted by the Editors Human Neuroscience Editorial Office., 2016. The discovery of the problem was made in 2015 by Ondrej Havlicek and announced in the Neurosceptic section of Discover Magazine Here, which was reviewing one of my papers on the topic. In an End-Note (Oct 2012) to an earlier paper on my web-pages Forsdyke DR, 2009 Here, I had juxtaposed the figure of Feuillet et al. (2007) with the one from the paper of Oliviera et al. (2011). With hindsight, it is easy to see that the photographs for the patient of Feuillet et al. are reproduced in Oliviera et al., without appropriate acknowledgement.

      .<br> However, the fact that the third repetition of an observation does not withstand scrutiny, in no way implies a similar problem with the first two reports, one by Lorber, and one by Oliviera et al. (2007). While many, like myself, remain sceptical, we await further independent reports (such as that provided by Rosie Raveis in the Neurosceptic blog), and post-mortem verifications of the patients described in the first two reports.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.