Subject: review
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 12:22:36 +0100
From: Arpad Pusztai <A.Pusztai@freenet.co.uk>
To: rebecca.bowden@royalsoc.ac.uk

Dear Dr Bowden,
I do not know what happened with my E-mail message.  It has gone out
from my computer and was not returned, so I think the trouble must be at
your end.  However, it is not important just now because this morning I
received your three referees' reports and this has put everything in a
different light.  I am afraid, the Royal Society has obviously not
accepted my offer of cooperation but proceeded regardless with the
review without taking up my offer of a personal input into your review
process.  As it is therefore the Royal Society's decision was to sit in
judgment of me rather than trying to establish the truth.   This is a
pity particularly as I am probably one of the most senior nutritional
scientists in the country with over 270 primary scientific publications
to my credit of which at least 40 have been on similar topic and using a
similar methodology to what is described in my INTERNAL REPORT which
your referees (unnamed) reviewed as a scientific paper.  But there it
is!  At least those 24 scientists who signed their memorandum on my
behalf were brave enough to put their name to their document while your
referees preserve their "impartiality" by remaining nameless.
    By the end of this week I shall have discussed this matter with my
solicitor in London, take his advice and then I shall probably reply in
some detail to the letter that I received this morning.  Clearly, with
the exception of your first referee who at least had the courtesy to
read my report, there is not much to write back on the comments made by
the other two.
    I feel really sad that a good opportunity has been missed.
Yours sincerely
Arpad Pusztai