Talk:Andrew J. Dannenberg

message: By convention at WP biographical articles, a discussion of controversies in which people have been involved comes at the end, not the beginning, of the article. i have moved the Norwegian matter accordingly. But I have another problem here--in the absence of actual evidence from a source more reliable in scientific matters than a newspaper that he is the main party in the fraud, the bulk of the material relating thereto belongs elsewhere, probably in the article dealing with the actual person who is primarily involved in it. Nor can this article be used as a coatrack for a discussion of the dangers of NSAIDS.  DGG (talk) 21:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fairness

message: The entry is nothing short of  libelous in its present form and requires serious editing. I don't read Norwegian but I Google-translated the news article in Verdens Gang (per Wikipedia, a tabloid, see Verdens Gang) that is cited as the main source for the assertion that Dannenberg was actively involved in the fraud. The Verdens Gang piece states that the data used in the article was supplied from Norway and refers to an ongoing investigation into the genesis of the article by an independent commission, which was underway at the time of the writing. A more conclusive narrative of events can be found in the Wikipedia entry on Jon Sudbo, who was the Norwegian researcher on the team that wrote the article, citing extensive sources (including the report of the independent commission's investigation, which is in Norwegian). The Sudbo entry makes it clear that it was Sudbo who fed false data into a study co-authored, among others, by Dannenberg. (Sudbo apparently was found to have committed a series of similar frauds including his dissertation, among others.) Based on this set of facts, it is libelous to insinuate that Dannenberg actively participated in the fraud (instead of being a victim of it), as the following passage does: 
According to the Norwegian daily Verdens Gang, Dannenberg may have been instrumental in the conception of the article [my emphasis] ([Verdens Gang citation], in Norwegian). An independent Commission of Inquiry led by Swedish Professor Anders Ekbom found no evidence that any of his co-authors had taken part in the fraud or otherwise been party to the deceit." [my emphasis] 
This passage even seems to imply that the sole co-author having taken part in the fraud was Dannenberg (the reference to "his" co-authors apparently referring to Dannenberg's co-authors (perhaps because cited out of context). The passage cites not to to the report of the independent commission (as it should for such an assertion) but to another press article in the Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter; however, that article has been removed from the Dagens Nyheter website. Without having read the report of the independent commission (in Norwegian), the Wikipedia entry on Sudbo states that none' of Sudbo's co-authors had taken part in the fraud and that he was the researcher supplying the fraudulent data. There is no source, not the report of the independent commission nor any other credible source, that pinpoints Dannenberg as having actively participated in the fraud. The Wikipedia entry on Sudbo mentions only that the independent commission criticized Sudbo's co-authors for lack of oversight - but that's a far cry from being accused of participating in a fraud. In sum, the passage on the Lancet story should either be deleted or re-written (preferably by someone who has read the independent commission report). If the Lancet incident is to be mentioned at all in the article on Dannenberg it's also questionable whether it should be given the prominence it currently has. Dannenberg has received various honors for his research, which ostensibly are much more relevant than his role in the Lancet incident. Freshi (talk) 00:09, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Libel

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Andrew Jess Dannenberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110903070348/http://www.aacr.org:80/home/scientists/scientific-achievement-awards/prevent-cancer-award.aspx to http://www.aacr.org/home/scientists/scientific-achievement-awards/prevent-cancer-award.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050511081646/http://www.cornellphysicians.com:80/andrewdannenberg/ to http://www.cornellphysicians.com/andrewdannenberg/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:17, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Would you please add the following sentence to the Wikipedia entry for Andrew Jess Dannenberg:
"Clarification: Andrew L. Dannenberg, MD, MPH, at the University of Washington (https://deohs.washington.edu/faculty/andrew-dannenberg) has no professional or personal connection with Andrew Jess Dannenberg, MD, formerly at Weill Cornell Medical College."
Thank you.
Andrew L. Dannenberg 97.113.42.16 (talk) 23:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  adding a sentence to existing Wikipedia entry 

message: Clarification: Andrew L. Dannenberg, MD, MPH, at the University of Washington (https://deohs.washington.edu/faculty/andrew-dannenberg) has no professional or personal connection with Andrew Jess Dannenberg, MD, formerly at Weill Cornell Medical College. 97.113.42.16 (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification:  Andrew Jess Dannenberg is not the same person as Andrew L. Dannenberg