Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.126 [SLACK_000340] · slack_pm:msg:01289

Date: 2020-07-31 10:57
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry
Topics: Vaccines

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

It's an OK response - she probably had to consult a lawyer to allow use of the term "disappointing, if." Consider thisa successful immunization if DT tries to push this further with Nature or if DT tries for some other journalist. Nature can't say they weren't warned. Journals - like universities - are risk adverse - don't want to do ANYTHING to damage the brand - if they can sweep under the rug that's their first impulse.

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

Statement	Grade	Attribution	Stance
It's an OK response - she probably had to consult a lawyer to allow use of the term "disappointing, if." Consider thisa successful immunization if DT tries to push this further with Nature or if DT tries for some other journalist.	quoted / not their view	quoted_external sentence carries quotation marks	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

quoted / not their view

quoted_external sentence carries quotation marks

asserts

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2020-07-31 09:47 Andrew Rambaut open

@Kristian Andersen Whether someone is dead or not?
2020-07-31 09:49 Andrew Rambaut open

@Kristian Andersen So will transfer. Thanks.
2020-07-31 09:50 Kristian G. Andersen open

@Kristian Andersen Yeah, if you have data like that in there that requires human subjects research approval so itends up with MedRxiv...
2020-07-31 10:10 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yeah, I agree we don't want to push it - however, from the email it doesn't appear that Clare thought about doing anything at all, which I really don't think is appropriate here - at a minimum she needs to contact the reviewers about the breach. I don't think that's an unreasonable request? I would kinda hope journals would take breachesseriously...
2020-07-31 10:57 Robert F. Garry

It's an OK response - she probably had to consult a lawyer to allow use of the term "disappointing, if." Consider thisa successful immunization if DT tries to push this further with Nature or if DT tries for some other journalist. Nature can't say they weren't warned. Journals - like universities - are risk adverse - don't want to do ANYTHING to damage the brand - if they can sweep under the rug that's their first impulse.
2020-07-31 11:13 Andrew Rambaut open

I agree. She probably wouldn't say if they did escalate it but my guess is a black mark against the reviewer (if only inClare's mind).

Full conversation →