On Aug 12, Science magazine published a strange journalistic article of an ongoing vitamin D asthma study. I responded on the next day
— Matthias Wjst (@science_surf) August 13, 2021
while now also the former editor-in-chief of Science Jeremy Berg noted
This is some of the most irresponsible and intellectually lazy science journalism I have seen from a venue like @sciencemagazine that should, indeed must, do better
— Jeremy Berg (@jeremymberg) October 27, 2021
Science printed the rebuttal of Berg
Piller minimizes the rationale used to select the placebo-controlled trial design and suggests that there is agreement that such a design is unethical… The News story notes that the majority of children in the trial were Black and states that this constitutes overrepresentation… Rather than being criticized, this trial should be commended for inclusion of appropriate trial participants…. Piller writes that participants were at increased risk of fractures and that the nine bone fractures experienced by study participants were more than anticipated, without specifying the magnitude of any increased risk or the anticipated number of fractures. However, there is no consensus that any increased risk exists…
Piller misrepresents the Vitamin D Kids Asthma Study (“Vit-D-Kids” or “VDKA”) . He reports concerns about the study’s design, participant safety and selection, consent forms, and report trans-parency. These doubts are unfounded. VDKA ethically investigated a potentially important treatment for childhood asthma.
Unfortunately the response of the news editor Tim Appenzeller is so weak that I would recommend to search now not only for a new correspondent but also a new editor.