Dr Richard Horton seems to admit that his behaviour was, in some
sense, “reckless” and reminds us that “the whole system depends on trust
and honour”. In 2005, I was alleged by Prince Charles’ private secretary
to have committed a breach of confidence.[1] Horton published a letter in
The Times stating that I had “broken every professional code of scientific
behaviour…”[2] This allegation was used in the 13 months investigation by
my university against me, at the end of which I was cleared of misconduct.
At the time I wrote to Horton asking him to explain his action. I had to
insist several times on a response but, eventually, he replied: “If my
letter to the Times was materially incorrect, I imagine that this will
rapidly become clear to anyone investigating the matter.[3] Despite my
innocence, funding for my unit subsequently dried up, my university did
never fulfil its promise to raise £1.5m for my research and we are now
scheduled to close in 2011.[4] I leave it to the reader to decide whether
Horton’s behaviour, in this instance was reckless or honourable.
Reference List
(1) Henderson M, Pierce A. Prince plots alternative treatments for
the NHS. The Times 2005; August 24:1.
(2) Horton R. Peer review of Prince's study into alternative
medicines. The Times 2005;29 August.
(3) Horton R. Email correspondence to E Ernst dated 15th Jan. 2006.
(4) Henderson M. Royal row 'threatens alternative medicine research'.
The Times 2010;3rd March.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests:
No competing interests
10 March 2010
Edzard Ernst
Professor of Complementary Medicine
Peninsual Medical School, University of Exeter, 25 Victoria Park Road, Exeter, EX2 4NT
Rapid Response:
Reckless?
Dr Richard Horton seems to admit that his behaviour was, in some
sense, “reckless” and reminds us that “the whole system depends on trust
and honour”. In 2005, I was alleged by Prince Charles’ private secretary
to have committed a breach of confidence.[1] Horton published a letter in
The Times stating that I had “broken every professional code of scientific
behaviour…”[2] This allegation was used in the 13 months investigation by
my university against me, at the end of which I was cleared of misconduct.
At the time I wrote to Horton asking him to explain his action. I had to
insist several times on a response but, eventually, he replied: “If my
letter to the Times was materially incorrect, I imagine that this will
rapidly become clear to anyone investigating the matter.[3] Despite my
innocence, funding for my unit subsequently dried up, my university did
never fulfil its promise to raise £1.5m for my research and we are now
scheduled to close in 2011.[4] I leave it to the reader to decide whether
Horton’s behaviour, in this instance was reckless or honourable.
Reference List
(1) Henderson M, Pierce A. Prince plots alternative treatments for
the NHS. The Times 2005; August 24:1.
(2) Horton R. Peer review of Prince's study into alternative
medicines. The Times 2005;29 August.
(3) Horton R. Email correspondence to E Ernst dated 15th Jan. 2006.
(4) Henderson M. Royal row 'threatens alternative medicine research'.
The Times 2010;3rd March.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests