This Monday, we'll be joined by Dr. John Oller, editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research.
The focus of the discussion will be on the peer review process:
What is peer review good for and how can we tell when it is working as it should?
Is the anonymity of reviewers a good thing, a bad thing, or indifferent?
Peer reviews of the past, present, and future.
What does the Committee on Publishing Ethics say about peer review?
Weaponization of the peer review process.
Monday 11/13 @ 7pm Eastern
John Oller
"A Conversation about Peer Review in Academic Publishing”
https://ipak-edu.org/registration/e/IPAK-EDU-Weekly-Directors-Science-Webinar-p521597083
Peer review is a particular problem with frontier science. "The history of modern science could be written on the basis of papers first rejected for publication." Preprint servers will no doubt see an ever growing role to bypass the conservatism of the academy.
America’s Broken Health Care: Diagnosis and Prescription, by John Abramson, best explains how pharma uses so-called Peer Review to pimp new drugs! I.e. pay a uniservity to do a "study" pay a doctor to hustle JAMA NEJM etc. to publish a "Peer Review" [science free] add in their journals, for so-called doctors to cite & sell pharm's new questionable drugs! i.e. why Big Pharma's have had to pay out over 5 Billion in Fraud fines! i.e. just the people you want to trust with your health, Right?