Prof Hooper’s detailed response to Prof White’s letter to Dr Horton, editor of the Lancet

Professor Malcolm Hooper, 28th May 2011:

Professor Malcolm Hooper’s Detailed Response to Professor Peter White’s letter to Dr Richard Horton about his complaint re: the PACE Trial articles published in The Lancet

28th May 2011

(Note that the complaint submitted by Professor Hooper to which Professor White responded can be accessed at http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/COMPLAINT-to-Lancet-re-PACE.htm ).

Professor Hooper believes that there are two related issues: (A) the inaccuracies in the undated letter sent by Professor Peter White on behalf of the co-authors of the PACE Trial article to Dr Richard Horton, Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet, refuting his complaint and (B) what Professor Hooper continues to believe are failures by The Lancet to fulfil its ethical duties with regard to the preparation and publication of the PACE Trial articles. Both are addressed in this document.

As Professor White’s letter is written in the third person, Professor Hooper has done likewise.


Part A: Reply to Professor Peter White’s response to the complaint submitted to The Lancet

Professor White’s letter, which can be read here, that was forwarded to Professor Hooper by Zoe Mullan, Senior Editor at The Lancet, appears to contain factual inaccuracies and errors; these are here addressed in order of presentation in Professor White’s letter.

In the interests of transparency, Professor White’s letter itself, together with evidence supporting an important aspect of the complaint to The Lancet, will be placed in the public domain together with this response. Read more>>