Jona Walk

@JonaWalk

Nijmegen

jonawalk.substack.com

Joined July 2010

Pinned
Jona Walk
@JonaWalk
Nov 10, 2025
I've experienced firsthand how financial and political interests dominate scientific institutions and limit academic freedom. In placing our careers ahead of the search for truth scientists have normalized things that should never be normal. And it is time to speak out. My talk:
00:00
Jona Walk
@JonaWalk
Aug 17
Eigenlijk slaat deze post de spijker op de kop. @MarcBonten illustreert perfect een groot probleem waar medische-wetenschap momenteel mee te maken heeft. Namelijk: "beter geen kritiek hebben op machtige personen en instanties, anders..."
Marc Bonten
@MarcBonten
Aug 17
Dit staat dan toch weer mooi op je CV: officieel op X uitgemaakt worden voor leugenaar door de editor-in-chief van @bmj_latest
Jona Walk
@JonaWalk
Aug 16
Like any brave publisher the editor in chief of @bmj_latest accused me of spreading misinformation in a post I can't reply to. But I do have something to say: @KamranAbbasi you seem awfully comfortable throwing around the word "misinformation" and that's terribly damaging to the
Kamran Abbasi
@KamranAbbasi
Aug 15
Utter garbage and predictable misinformation about the retraction. It was not political. We were not pressurised — by anyone. We completed the investigation, gave the authors a fair hearing, and we appropriately retracted. We did make a mistake, yes, it was publishing the paper.
Jona Walk
@JonaWalk
Aug 15
Interesting article in the Daily Telegraph by @sarahknapton about the @bmj_latest choice to retract a paper on Covid-19 and excess mortality, and our criticism of this decision. Rare example of balanced reporting on this topic. telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/1… - archive.is/vCl3X
Jona Walk
@JonaWalk
Aug 12
Yesterday @bmj_latest retracted a paper on Covid-19 and excess mortality. There were no methodological, data or analysis flaws in the paper. The BMJ's reason? They found the discussion 'unbalanced'. They came to that conclusion not during editorial consideration or extensive peer
Jona Walk
@JonaWalk
Aug 12
Yesterday @bmj_latest retracted a paper on Covid-19 and excess mortality. There were no methodological, data or analysis flaws in the paper. The BMJ's reason? They found the discussion 'unbalanced'. They came to that conclusion not during editorial consideration or extensive peer