Anders Romelsjö har kommenterat på:
Jag vill informera att Wilkinson & Pickett utförligt bemöter kritiken från Snowdon, en ekonom utan vidimerad vetenskaplig kompetens, och andra på ”The equality Trust”, http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/docs/response-to-snowdon.pdf. Dessa forskare lyckas mycket väl bemöta kritiken från Snowdon och andra i 20 punkter. Wilkinson & Picket skriver bl.a.
” In contrast to our approach, much the most common strategy used by our critics has been to selectively remove or add countries to our analyses in an attempt to make the damaging effects of inequality disappear. But it is important to note that the criticisms are entirely ad hoc criticisms of each relationship between inequality and a social outcome. This means they are irrelevant to almost all of the very many other demonstrations of similar relationships in different settings published in academic journals by other researchers.”... ”We show (below) the weaknesses of each of these ad hoc criticisms of our data, but it should be remembered that, even if they were all accepted, there are many other demonstrations of these relationships in other settings where the criticisms of our work are entirely irrelevant.”
”Almost all of the research we present and synthesise in The Spirit Level (”Jämlikhetsanden”) had previously been peer-reviewed, and is fully referenced therein." De menar vidare (kanske något godtroget) "In order to distinguish between well founded criticism and unsubstantiated claims made for political purposes, all future debate should take place in peer-reviewed publications”.
Se för övrigt recension i Läkartidningen nr 36.
Finns det någon bluff? Var i så fall? Läs även svaret från Wilkinson & Pickett
Anders Romelsjö, professor, inst folkhälsovetenskap, KI
