A twelve-year retraction delay let the misinformation spread unchecked.

Evidence

Unfortunately, it wasn’t until 2010, almost twelve years after its original publication, that The Lancet officially retracted the bogus paper, with the journal’s editor-in-chief describing it as ‘utterly false.’ Wakefield was struck off the medical register after having been found guilty of misconduct by the UK’s General Medical Council, who concluded that he abused his position and acted without ethics approval and with callous disregard for the wellbeing of the children in the study. But twelve years is a very long time for the continued influence of misinformation to fester. Although the incubation period for misinformation pathogens is currently unknown – and probably quite variable – I think it’s safe to say that twelve years is more than sufficient to do some serious damage. — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 259

Categorization

• QUESTION: The incubation period metaphor for misinformation is intriguing — how long until debunked claims lose influence? Worth chasing the misinformation-inoculation timeline literature.
• XREF: connects to: Official denial of a phenomenon enables that phenomenon to expand unchecked — Khaled A. Beydoun, The New Crusades_ Islamophobia and the…, 347

Broader Connections

• Official denial of a phenomenon enables that phenomenon to expand unchecked #expands (0.75) — Khaled A. Beydoun, The New Crusades_ Islamophobia and the…, 347