Quote:
Originally Posted by Halk
This is the body of the complaint I sent to the BBC.
Quote:
|
The study was funded by paper book publishers, so there is a clear conflict of interest . . .
|
|
Not that I see.
Here is the funding:
Quote:
|
National Institutes of Health (NIH) Award UL1 RR025758 and financial contributions from the Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), Harvard University, and its other affiliated academic health care centers]. This work was supported by NIH Grant R01HL077453. The inpatient studies were conducted in the Harvard CTSC, supported by NCRR Grant UL1 RR025758. A-M.C. was supported in part by NIH Grant K01HL115458. D.A. was supported in part by the German Aerospace Center. J.F.D. was supported in part by NIH Grant R01HL094654. C.A.C. was supported in part by NASA NNX10AF47G and the National Space Biomedical Research Institute through NASA NCC 9-58
|
True, the fourth author has received
likely tiny book royalties. Is that what you mean? Should we then dismiss the ideas of everyone who ever wrote a traditionally published book? The study also notes that the same author has received consulting fees from Microsoft and Apple, both vendors of light-emitting devices the study shows to have a negative effect.