...and the Maudsley should be transparent too
On reflection the implications for the Maudsley Hospital and its
teaching institution, the Institute of Psychiatry, are profound. They have
in effect indulged Dr Goldacre's career, and benefitted from his
journalism, without taking responsibility for it. Dr Goldacre, for
example, gave a seminar at the Institute entitled 'Science and Journalism'
on 10 December . A check on Pub Med suggests the only articles he has
published are journalistic.
Does the hospital take responsibility for Dr Goldacre's website where
he warns bloggers:
".. personal anecdotes about your MMR tragedy will be deleted for
your own safety" 
Is this ethically tolerable, or a proper way to do science? I believe
they have to look at their position.
Competing interests: No competing interests