The Chronicle: California Court Protects a Professor’s Right to Criticize Research
How far can one scientist go in criticizing the work of another before committing libel? A California judge decided this week that, at least in the bizarre case of a controversial study involving prayer, words like “fraud,” “guilty,” and “plagiarism” are fair game in the scientific literature.
“We’re breathing a sigh of relief,” said Bruce L. Flamm, who wrote those critical words about the study. The resolution to the case was a victory for academic freedom, said Dr. Flamm, a volunteer clinical professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California at Irvine and a physician with Kaiser Permanente.
But he also said the lawsuit brought against him last year would have a chilling effect on scholarly discourse. “I’ve spoken to colleagues who find the lawsuit to be absolutely frightening,” he said.
The case centers on a 2001 study published in The Journal of Reproductive Medicine. The paper purported to show that prayer by anonymous people in North America and Australia could double the chances of success for South Korean women undergoing fertilization procedures, who were unaware of the prayers. The authors of that paper were Kwang Y. Cha, a prominent fertility specialist in South Korea and California; Rogerio A. Lobo, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Columbia University Medical Center; and Daniel Wirth, a lawyer who studies the paranormal.
Follow
