LGBT shuts down science

[Angrboda]

https://news.brown.edu/articles/2018/08/gender

As you may be aware, Brown late last week posted a news announcement regarding research on gender dysphoria published by a faculty member in the School of Public Health. In light of questions raised about research design and data collection related to the study on “rapid onset gender dysphoria,” the University determined that removing the article from news distribution is the most responsible course of action.

The research had been published in the scientific journal PLOS ONE, which stated in a comment posted on the study August 27 that the journal “will seek further expert assessment on the study’s methodology and analyses.” Independent of the University’s removal of the article because of concerns about research methodology, the School of Public Health has heard from Brown community members expressing concerns that the conclusions of the study could be used to discredit efforts to support transgender youth and invalidate the perspectives of members of the transgender community.

As it made it through peer review, the charges on methodology are BS. Or, peer review is BS. Take your pick.

I choose false dichotomy for the win. Peer review can be ineffective in certain cases without indicting the usefulness of peer review in general. The problem is you are viewing peer review is some sort of guarantor of specific qualities in published research. It is not. It is simply a tool that is applied toward the end of establishing scientific truth. As is post peer review analysis and commentary. As noted, review of scientific research doesn't end once a paper is published. There have been papers that have been withdrawn after publication because of fraudulent data or results. That the original peer review did not catch these cases suggests only that peer review is not 100% effective, but no one is claiming that it is. And I'll point out that you omitted bolding the part where the Brown letter noted that the concerns about transgender youth and the transgender community were independent of the university's action in the matter, so you seem to be basing your skepticism of the process upon something that was not a part of the process. This is not to say that the study wasn't pulled for political reasons alone. It may have been. Only time and actual examination of the issues will tell. But that's not what you've presented here. Regardless, your implied claim that peer review is "BS" if the methodological charges are valid only shows that you have a rather absolutist view of peer review, that it's all or nothing.