[Foundation-l] Misplaced Reliance, was Re: Paid editing, was Re: Ban and...

[Fred Bauder]

> On 31 October 2010 21:27, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> > I don't think it is worth mentioning, unless every time it is
>> mentioned
>> > it
>> > is done in a way to tell readers that this is not only normal, it is
>> > required.
>> >
>> > Risker/Anne
>>
>> The history of this issue has involved manufacturers taking control of
>> the studies to the extent that unfavorable results were sometimes not
>> published while favorable results were. Journal editors cracked down on
>> that, see:
>>
>> http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/165/6/786
>>
>> Fred
>>
>>
> Well, that has nothing to do with who paid for the study. It has to do
> with
> whether or not they reported all of the studies that they did. The two
> are
> not connected. What happens, too, when studies are carried out but the
> scientists cannot find someone to peer review them or publish them, even
> with massive critique? This happens a lot. Does that mean the study is
> unreported, or simply that nobody wants to waste time or space on them?
>
> Risker/Anne
>

You don't seem to have read the cited article. And to be changing the
subject. Peer review decides what is to be published, based on quality
and significance. Errors are made as scientists hold views as to what
that is at any particular time and venue which may be more or less
enlightened.

Fred