Нашла коммент акушерки о котором писали на сайте Материнства.
What the associate editor of the BMJ thinks of rapid responses
Alison E Powell, Former midwife
Cambridge
The article "Lactation wars" (BMJ 2011; 342:d835) by Christopher Martyn (associate editor of the BMJ) includes the following:
"Mind you, some of the rapid responses on bmj.com weren't much better. I won't give examples because they're only a click away, and you can form your own view. The charitable explanation is that these correspondents didn't really mean what they said, which is always a danger when the heat of the moment coincides with the availability of instant communication. I'd like to see "rapid responses" axed and replaced with "considered responses." This new section wouldn't allow comments for at least a week after the article was published, and there would be a cooling -off period between submission and publication. Anyone sending something in would have to confirm, 48 hours after they first sent it, that they really did want it posted."
As one of those rapid response correspondents on bmj.com, I would like to assure Christopher Martyn that I really did mean what I said, and that today, almost four weeks after I submitted that initial response, I do still want it posted.
I am surprised that an associate editor of the BMJ would appear in print to express such contempt for rapid responders (who are by definition among the journal's readership). Could it be that some of those responses - particularly those that questioned the BMJ's decision to publish this article in the first place - touched an editorial nerve?
Or perhaps Christopher Martyn didn't really mean what he said and should have allowed himself a cooling-off period?
Нет времени переводить сейчас, кто владеет английским лучшем чем я, плиз тыкнете меня носом в текст, где есть такая инфа(беглый просмотр не дал результата):
"«Я сообщаю, что трое из четверых авторов этой статьи выполняли консультационную работу и/или получили финансирование в течение последних 3 лет от компаний, производящих детские смеси и детские прикормы. Такие компании имеют шансы выиграть как прямо, так и косвенно от национальной политики раньше прекращать исключительное грудное вскармливание – или же от публикации статей в СМИ, которые подрывают кормление грудью».
ПыСы. Чуть что- я нейтральная сторона, не пропагандирую ни ВОЗ, ни новомодные исследования, ни Рожану, ни советы консультантов по ГВ. Я за логику и здравый смысл во всем, и в части прикорма тож.
: 1 ... 185 186 188 189 ... 382 Далее» Вниз