Validity of Canadian studies: Author's response

doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7437.465-a

BMJ 2004;328:465 (21 February), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7437.465-a

Letter

Validity of Canadian studies

Author's response

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—My detailed response to the news report by Whiteon the validity of my studies is available on bmj.com.^1
2

The report contains several inaccuracies. The typographic errorof writing SE instead of SD had already been acknowledged. Wedid not ask the subjects to remember and recount 50 digits.I provided detailed responses to all the comments of Robertsand Sternberg. However, Meguid (the editor) took the unfairstep of sending my response to them and they modified theircommentary and added a figure that I did not see before publication.

In science there is scope for different methods of analyses.It is impossible to conduct statistical analyses from our publishedpaper of the kind claimed by Roberts. Repeated requests to Roberts,Sternberg, and Meguid about their funding and honorariums havenot yielded a response.

President Meisen of Memorial University and his advisers lookedat my manuscript; . . . [Full text of this article]

Ranjit K Chandra, retired

Y-182 Regency Park II, Gurgaon 122002, India nutres2002@yahoo.com