Medical Journals Are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Companies

R

revita

[banned as spam]
Messages
2
This is just my first time to read that article. And from what I've learn and noticed to it. Some of the comments really have points. But still it is a great article.
 
*GG*

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,397
Location
Concord, NH
Mike Adams on Natural News is always saying this. FYI

He said he thinks PlosOne is the best because they do not do advertisement for Pharmaceuticals.

GG
 
SOC

SOC

Senior Member
Messages
7,849
Just because PlosOne doesn't advertise for Pharmaceuticals, it doesn't follow that th

ggingues said:
Mike Adams on Natural News is always saying this. FYI

He said he thinks PlosOne is the best because they do not do advertisement for Pharmaceuticals.

GG
Click to expand...

Yeah, now if they could only get good peer reviewers who could distinguish researcher failure and researcher bias (including sponsor-bias) from real research. The politics might be better at PlosOne, but the science isn't (necessarily). Pharmaceutical companies can get all kinds of biased info into PlosOne if they want to. The "research" just has to sound more-or-less okay to some reviewer whose knowledge set is somewhere on the same planet as the research topic. That doesn't mean that all the research published in PlosOne is bad; it just means that it's a monstrous buyer beware situation. The reviewer may not know any more about the topic than you do, AND has to do the review in a hurry. I suspect there's a lot of biased info published in PlosOne. It's pitifully easy to get published in PlosOne, so why wouldn't pharmaceutical companies be funding quick and dirty research to publish there? I wouldn't trust any research about the efficacy of any pharmaceutical published in PlosOne.

PlosOne has its place, but it's not in high-level cutting edge research.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back