Yeah - looks like an over-zealous school prefect approach!
I would have thought that a clarification - explaining that the study was financed by Lumos and that the public health savings did not constitute a potential revenue target (which was obvious anyway) - would have been sufficient. After all, the study, despite its funding, was undertaken by a reputable company and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Retraction is overkill and appears to be the result of unwarranted 'bullying'.
Ann: Update on Economic Evaluation of FebriDx, page-6
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 3 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
