The Amer J Epid article you cite as a "special article" is an opinion piece, not a peer-reviewed study. According to the journal in its Editor’s note: "The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Journal of Epidemiology or the other members of the editorial board." The fact that the article is an opinion piece doesn't mean it cannot be valid, but its existence hardly proves your characterization of Dr. Risch as"a man of good reputation and principled investigation, as was shown in his May 27 special article in the Amer J Epid."

There are in fact three responses in the Amer J Epid. critical of Dr. Risch's opinion piece; Rish agrees with one (more or less) and disagrees with one.

I am not qualified to weigh the merits of the criticisms and defenses, but even as a non-professional, I can determine that the publication of the opinion piece does not in itself establish the "good reputation" and "principled investigation" of Dr Risch. Nor does the Lancet “hit piece” on hydroxychloroquine in any way (that I’m aware) disqualify the objections of the Yale faculty in their letter expressing objections to the claims of Dr. Risch. The Lancet scandal and the Yale faculty letter are apples and oranges.