Selective Publication of Abortion Related Research Results

By plb on January 6, 2006 6:20 PM | No Comments

Yesterday, we noted the negative impact of abortion on young women by linking to an article which reported that New Zealand researchers have confirmed a substantial increase in the risk for mental health problems following an abortion.

Today, LifeNews has published a fascinating article that reveals resistance by some medical journals to publish the results. Check it out:

Professor David Fergusson backs abortion, but when he conducted a research study showing women who have abortions are significantly more likely to suffer from severe depression, he says a handful of medical journals refused to publish his report.

(...) Fergusson told the Herald he knew of the "circus" that could result from the study but he said it would be "scientifically irresponsible" to not publish the results even though they are controversial.

Read the rest here.

As "irresponsible" as this might sound, there is also an increasing concern that false findings may be prevelant in published research claims, at least according to an analysis in the open access international medical journal PLoS Medicine by researcher John Ioannidis (see Most published research findings may be false).

Given the embryonic stem cell debacle, is this at all surprising? Also, remember the revelation last year that a JAMA article on fetal pain was authored by abortion providers (guess what they concluded).

The point is in all of this is that the results of scientific observation may be useful, but they serve a poor foundation for one's ethical standards.