An article that sparked a national debate about how much people should worry about Zika and what precautions they should take to avoid contracting it has been retracted.
The paper published a story that was based on a study that said the Zika outbreak in Brazil could spread to the US.
It was widely believed that the paper was misleading the public, and the story was widely criticized for its inaccuracy.
A spokesperson for the Journal of the American Medical Association said it was retracting the story and apologized for its publication.
The paper retracted the story for the following reasons:The article relied on an erroneous estimate of the incidence of Zika virus infection in the US based on the results of a study by the CDC that had been widely criticized by the public.
The CDC said there was no difference in the incidence between men and women who contracted Zika from sex, and that the researchers had failed to provide enough information to justify their assumptions.
Zika has been linked to microcephaly, a condition that can result in birth defects in babies born to mothers who are infected.
It has also been linked with Guillain-Barré syndrome, a rare neurological condition that causes severe muscle weakness, mental retardation and sometimes paralysis.
Since the publication of the article, the CDC has confirmed there have been no new cases of microcepaly, and it is unclear whether microcephelets have become more common or have spread to other countries.
However, the paper’s editor, David J. Graziano, said that although the paper had made mistakes, it had taken steps to correct them.
Graziano told CNNMoney that the article did not provide enough data to support the findings and that it had a history of doing that.
“The reason we made those corrections is because we didn’t have enough data,” Grazian said.
“We’re trying to do what we can do to make sure this doesn’t happen again.”
A spokesperson with the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, a group that represents doctors, told CNN that the journal had accepted the paper and that “this kind of error is inexcusable and we take it very seriously.”
The statement added that the ASAHH would look into the journal’s actions.