|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 5, 2011 20:29:11 GMT 1
If peer review was a drug it would never be allowed onto the market,’ says Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of the Journal Of the American Medical Association and intellectual father of the international congresses of peer review that have been held every four years since 1989. Peer review would not get onto the market because we have no convincing evidence of its benefits but a lot of evidence of its flaws. breast-cancer-research.com/content/12/S4/S13 |
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Jan 6, 2011 20:43:01 GMT 1
And what relevance do you think peer-review in the medical domain (whcih has its own particular problems when it comes to drug trials and non-reporting of negative results by pharmaceutical companies......) has to peer-review in any other area of science?
We ALL know that medical stuff has its own particular problems, problems not necessarily shared by other subject areas.
Might as well say -- doctors used to think smoking was okay for you, hence AGW is all nonsense, has as much relevance as this remark.....................
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 7, 2011 12:16:37 GMT 1
"what relevance do you think peer-review in the medical domain (whcih has its own particular problems when it comes to drug trials and non-reporting of negative results by pharmaceutical companies......) has to peer-review in any other area of science?"
Someone as bright as you think you are should be able to work this out, I'm afraid, Speaker.
|
|
