Originally Posted by larryz
Yes, so-called "peer-reviewed" journals filled with advertisements from -- hold your breath -- pharmaceutical companies, written by yes-men for said industry. Problem is, who are these "peers" and should we believe lock stock and barrel what they write? Do you really expect unbiased opinions from studies funded by drug companies who in turn fund medical schools? Please. Your track record is obvious here as well. Good luck with that.
Have you ever read a peer-reviewed journal? No.
Well, one of the tenets of the system is that any
conflict of interest (i.e. funding from a drug company) is declared at the top of any article. If they are not declared and later found out to be funded by an interested party, then the articles are detracted and in some severe cases, practitioners have actually been struck off the medical register. In the 'Great MMR Autism Scam' Andrew Wakefield did not
declare that he was funded by a pseudoscience group (like the ones you cite) with a conflict of interest and as a result thousands of people contracted perfectly preventable - and potentially fatal - diseases.
Andrew Wakefield was struck off the medical register. The peer-review process here was not an ideal solution because the results were falsified. Now, the peer-review system is not
perfect and exists to scan out systematic errors in research - i.e. poor statistical analysis. In this particular instance, an antivax group caused a great deal of damage.
Larry, you have repeatedly repeated a number of pseudoscientific claims without an ounce of evidence or citation. I will admit (as would anyone interested in science) that the peer-review system has flaws - but it's a damn sight better than an interested nutter buying a domain, buying some server space and writing whatever the Hell they like
with no backing, research, credibility or evidence - which is the bollocks that you are continually bringing up.
Honestly, I despair at the state of the US education system if it produces people that don't understand the basics of the scientific method and why it's so &%*@ing important to back up your claims with evidence and research
Incidentally, I come from the UK where the drug companies do not
necessary fund medical training and our health system is owned by the state. The only vested interest financially comes from politicians - which is a totally different kettle of fish.