« Hasidic Rebbes Gather In Jerusalem To Combat New Goverment’s “Anti-Haredi” Decisions | Main | Haredi Man In Bag On Plane Says Rabbi Told Him To Do It »

April 15, 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

zibble

Once again, your investigative reporting rules!

But the link you provided at the end comes up with a blank page.

Garnel Ironheart

> Not only that, the study is an internal practice review, was never published, is not peer reviewed and apparently was done in response to arequest from Agudath Israel of America or one of their supporters.

Should've been the first clues as to whether or not to ignore it.

Adam Neira

Many "scientific" reports authored by "prestigious" academic institutions are not worth the paper they are written on. What matters is the quality of the science. There are so many people with highfalutin titles these days that it is hard for the curious punter to know who is really wise or not. Also, obfuscation is rampant. When important debates come up on various issues, some people will throw everything including the kitchen sink into the mix to confuse matters.

Re. MBP. I repeat...

It is very simple. It should be banned. It is a minhag not a mitzvot. If the health and safety of children is not what Judaism is about in 2013/5773 what is it about ?

Yochanan Lavie

Shmarya, you missed a great headline potential: "Penn penis study comes up short."

Editor

Yochanan Lavie –

Lol!

Luke

"Penn penis study comes up short."

Posted by: Yochanan Lavie | April 15, 2013 at 07:15 AM

Phenomenal !

Luke.

WoolSilkCotton

YL, you should write for the NY Post!

Yochanan Lavie

Thanks, fellas.

Reuven

Philadelphia Kollel..... Why does this not surprise me at all.

z's friend

Maybe you shouldnt read any study that argues with what you hold by? I mean, if there's a study that proves otherwise. Its for sure legit. And if it's like this one. It's automatically garbage. So much for your brains. Or lack thereof. For Christ sake

Editor

zs friend –

I think you need to look in a mirror. You are talking about yourself, not me.

z's friend

Not at all. The reason I read your site at all is in order to be more objective and less subjective. The problem is that I find way too much hate, rather than objective criticism.

Editor

zs friend–

Perhaps you should spend some time studying up on conflict of interest declarations and on evaluation bias. Every scientist and physician I know who saw what Penn Med did with study is horrified. The general consensus is that the two researchers should be publicly reprimanded or fired – especially the internist linked to the Philly Kollel. You simply do understand how wrong these two are.

Alter Kocker

One cannot help but wonder, if the authors of this report that hold MD's were questioned by the state licencing authorities and/or the AMA, would they recant if their medical licenses were in jeopardy?

I'm fairly certain if your livelihood and all that surrounds that degree were in danger of revocation because of your allegiance to a group of pseudo-scientific neanderthals, you would make the decision to withdraw your name and credentials from this publication.

That would tell the story.

WoolSilkCotton

AK, they don't face state license being revoked, and the AMA has no power over doctors. What they do face is an ethical misconduct charge by the university, which could result in a reprimand, all the publications they've ever done to be deleted from the scientific literature, and they would lose academic rank, as well as extreme embarrassment in the academic and medical world. Medical and scientific journals would carry the story. As a byproduct, the penis sucking ritual will become big news in the medical and scientific world.

WoolSilkCotton

AK, I'm sure they will deny deny deny any wrongdoing. Being frum, lying will not be a problem for them. And no doubt, they will scream antisemitism.

dh

Obviously he's not going to do that.

cosmopolite

Mr Rosenberg, thank you so much for this awesome post. When I learned of the Penn "study", I smelled a rat, if only because the names of the authors were not revealed. Thanks to you, I know my hunch was correct.

What the two authors did was to misuse their connection to Penn's Centre for Evidence Based Practice to advance personal goals. In my view, that is grounds for dismissal.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Search this site with Google:

Comment Rules

  1. No anonymous comments.
  2. Use only one name or alias and stick with that.
  3. Do not use anyone else's name or alias.
  4. Do not sockpuppet.
  5. Try to argue using facts and logic.
  6. Do not lie.
  7. No name-calling, please.
  8. Do not post entire articles or long article excerpts.
***Violation of these rules may lead to the violator's comments being edited or his future comments being banned.***
6a00d83451b71f69e201b8d1656462970c-250wi

FailedMessiah.com in the Media