Theodore Dalrymple - False Positive: A Year of Error, Omission, and Political Correctness in the New England Journal of Medicine

FALSE POSITIVE

A Year of Error, Omission,
and Political Correctness in the
NEW ENGLAND
JOURNAL of MEDICINE

Theodore Dalrymple

2019 by Theodore Dalrymple

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of Encounter Books, 900 Broadway, Suite 601, New York, New York, 10003.

First American edition published in 2019 by Encounter Books, an activity of Encounter for Culture and Education, Inc., a nonprofit, tax exempt corporation.

Encounter Books website address: www.encounterbooks.com

Manufactured in the United States and printed on acid-free paper. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.481992
(R 1997) (Permanence of Paper).

FIRST AMERICAN EDITION

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Names: Dalrymple, Theodore, author.

Title: False positive : a year of error, omission, and political correctness in the New England journal of medicine / by Theodore Dalrymple.

Description: New York : Encounter Books, 2019. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2018060034 (print) | LCCN 2019000052 (ebook) | ISBN 9781641770477 (ebook) | ISBN 9781641770460 (hardcover : alk. paper)

Subjects: | MESH: New England journal of medicine. | Publication Bias | Periodicals as Topic

Classification: LCC R118.6 (ebook) | LCC R118.6 (print) | NLM WZ 345 | DDC 610.72--dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018060034

To the Memory of Joseph Hartmann, M.D.
Cardiologist and kindred spirit

No head so headly can be given,

But error slippery will creep in.

For man without error scarcely be,

So that error exceedeth all diligency.

Robert Recorde,
The Grounde of Artes, 1552

CONTENTS

Introduction

M ost doctors read medical journals for guidance in their practice and assume that the summary and conclusions at the end of articles are more or less justified by what goes before. After all, medical journals have editors whose job it is not only to select articles worthy of inclusion but also to eliminate obvious error. For most of my career, I believed that they did their job.

This is the belief, too, of most journalists who relay the results of medical research to the general public as if they were incontestable. Of necessity, perhaps, journalists take the summary and conclusions of scientific papers at face value, having neither the time nor the inclination to inquire much further. A straightforward or unequivocal scientific fact is journalistically more compelling than is a still-unanswered question. Likewise, a doubling of the risk of a disease is a more dramatic story than the extreme unlikelihood of contracting the disease in the first place, even at double the risk a small detail that medical journals often omit.

Since my retirement from medical practice, I have had time to read journals with much closer attention and have come to realize just how flawed much of their content is. One cannot take accuracy or even veracity for granted, irrespective of how many eminent editors are on the masthead of a journal. The responsibility for detecting error is the readers, and he must keep his mind open as much to what has been omitted as to what is included. Ever since Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, one of the most famous medical authors of all time, recorded the exploits and dicta of Sherlock Holmes, we have been aware that the silence of the dog that did not bark may be as eloquent as any barking could be. The more carefully I read medical papers, the more often the dog that did not bark in the nighttime seems to me an important lesson. What is not said is often very revealing, especially to suspicious minds like mine has become.

I was encouraged to write this book after my nephew Joseph, who is a medical student in Paris, asked my help before the examination that he was about to take in the proper, critical way to read a medical research paper. I was never taught this and wish that I had been. In trying to help him, I clarified my own ideas.

The causes of error are multitudinous, and range from carelessness to dishonesty, from wishful thinking to outright corruption, with everything in between. Medical research relies on ever-more-complex statistics to conclude anything at all, and common sense is often the first victim of technical sophistication. But there is no such thing as a perfect paper that omits nothing, answers all possible questions and cannot be criticized on any ground.

In the following pages, I examine the contents of the New England Journal of Medicine over the course of a year. Along with the Lancet, it is the most important and influential general medical journal in the world. When it pronounces on social philosophy, as it often does, it reads like