We so prefer the British Medical Journal to the Lancet that we almost never link to the Lancet.
Starting with the 1998 vaccine/autism paper, to the fact it took the Lancet 12 years to retract it, to the two Iraq death toll papers, papers based on models that were refuted with the simple question: Where are the bodies?, to the fraudulent hydroxychloriquine paper (and retraction) used by the WHO to halt clinical trials, to the letter published by the Lancet organized by Daszak stating the Wuhan Institute of Virology could not have been the source of WuFlu (with 26 of the 27 co-signers having undisclosed connections to the Wuhan Institute), and three or four more instances that have slipped my memory at the moment.
The TL;dr is, sadly, after all these years, you can't trust the Lancet.
From ScienceAlert, December 14:
Have you ever wondered why we single out brain surgeons and rocket scientists as the crème de la crème of the human intelligence pool?
Given we use the phrases 'It's not rocket science' and 'It's not brain surgery' interchangeably, who would win out in a battle of the ultimate wits?
In The BMJ's light-hearted Christmas Issue, a team of definitely unbiased neuroscientists tried to find out scientifically who deserves the crown.
"The phrase 'It's not rocket science' is thought to have originated in America in the 1950s when German rocket scientists were brought over to support the developing space program and design of military rockets," a research team led by University College London neuroscientist Inga Usher explain in their new paper.
"The origin of 'It's not brain surgery' is less clear. It is tempting to speculate that the pioneering techniques of the polymath and neurosurgeon Harvey Cushing captured the attention of the public and promulgated the phrase."
Regardless of the verbal origins, in their experiment the researchers analyzed the cognitive test scores of 329 aerospace engineers and 72 neurosurgeons, comparing participants' skills in problem solving, including planning and reasoning, working memory, attention, and emotion-processing abilities....
....MUCH MORE
Although ScienceAlert doesn't link to the whole BMJ Christmas issue, we do.
And on their ghosts of Christmas past page they seem quite proud of a 2014 paper, “The Darwin Awards: sex differences in idiotic behaviour” (720,296 page impressions in its first 12 months) "a contender for the most popular BMJ Christmas article ever."
