Editor Michael Meguid wrote that the journal was "forced to act" after a series of "serious questions" were raised. The retraction outlines eight specific reasons for the decision, "all of which [Chandra] either ignored or dealt with inadequately in his responses to his critics," according to Meguid, over whose signature the withdrawal appears.
The retraction cited significant statistical errors in Chandra's
The paper—done when Chandra was working at Memorial University in Newfoundland—had been published by
"A group of scientists and investigators found some of the claims made [were] implausible, not reproducible, that the basis on which the data was analyzed was not appropriate and could not yield the results claimed," Meguid told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Contacted by
There was also concern that "Chandra failed to declare that he holds a patent on the tested supplement formula and has a financial stake in it because the supplement was licensed to Javaan Corporation, a company founded by his daughter, that sells the supplement," Meguid wrote in the retraction.
Although Javaan's toll-free order line was working this morning, the company's main listed number was not in service when
Last year, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) also tried to look into the concerns over Chandra's study, but Chandra continued to refuse to provide his research data to Memorial University, "so the investigation is incomplete," said CIHR spokeswoman Janet Weichel-MacKenzie.
"We're pleased that [
"Our point has been, all along, that we have a responsibility to create conditions that allow research to happen, but we don't vet it directly; we don't say that any piece of research done by any particular researcher should or should not be published. That's the role of the peers and the journal editors," Strawbridge said. "If