Thank you for your brief initial reply (28 May) on the problem of the University of Sydney’s high-profile scientists publishing - and failing to correct - factually incorrect conclusions on the causes of Australia's obesity epidemic [CJ: Sounds like the RBA mate!].
All of the above raises a whole range of public-health and conflict-of-interest issues to be considered by the University of Sydney. Facts matter, especially when we are talking about scientists at one of Australia's leading universities misinforming the public debate on the causes of obesity and diabetes, today’s single-biggest health issue for a growing proportion of society. It is unacceptable for a trusted part of the science community to not correct the public record as soon as it becomes clear that the public has been misinformed. We are well past that point. [CJ: In case you were not aware, Rory has been landing repeated head-shots, and your knees look like they are about to drop to the canvass.]
Given the importance of this issue, you perhaps will understand that until the public record is corrected, I am unable to take the University of Sydney's outsourcing of its quality control to the little-respected pay-for publication E-journal Nutrients as the last word in this dispute. Indeed, I challenge the University of Sydney’s scores of fine scientists – indeed, any scientist, nutritionist, medical doctor, economist, journalist or enthusiastic observer anywhere - to prove that my critique of Australian Paradox is mistaken. [CJ: Oh no, guys, get out of the ring. Run as far as you can! Last time Rory challenged somebody, the guy was ridiculed all the way from Canberra to Mount Kosciuszko. This is lose-lose. Don't do it.]