Go Back   Catalyst Athletics Forums > Nutrition > General Nutrition

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-06-2007, 09:50 PM   #11
Dave Van Skike
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: PNW
Posts: 1,738
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre Auge View Post
Dave I was just being an ass... I apologize my humour was not constructive in the least. Nor funny!
Sometimes being and ass is the most constructive thing one can do.....

no offense taken. I'm not arguing to far in favor of peer review. Over-reliance on peer review as a benchmark gives us such brilliant offerings as quackwatch.com. The founder of which is if not a quack, at least a twit.
Dave Van Skike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2007, 03:50 PM   #12
Neal Winkler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 326
Default

The peer reviewed process is good in that it keeps any old idiot from getting his opinion out, but it's bad in that it can stifle creavity, and questioning of the status quo.
Neal Winkler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2007, 09:06 AM   #13
Robb Wolf
Senior Member
 
Robb Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,444
Default

I looked around for an article in JAMA a few years ago talking about the limitations of the peer review system. It is not as rock solid as ti appears. The low carb debacle is just one example.

I worked in a lab that really could only publish in a couple of journals. One of the review committee was...drum roll...in a competing lab. We could never prove that it was this guy who nit-picked that crap out of our papers but it slowed our submissions and publishing significantly. It's not to say it's worthless but the peer review process can be much more about politics than science. Remember when folate became "super important" to prevent everything from neural tube deficits to heart disease? The guy who did the pioneering research on that did it in the late 60's!!! He was run out of I think it was harvard and he had to beg, borrow and steal lab time for nearly 35 years before he was vindicated. all because his findings did not square with what peer review thought should happen. Extreme example but that stuff does happen.
__________________
"Survival will be neither to the strongest of the species, nor to the most intelligent, but to those most adaptable to change."
C. Darwin

Robb's Blog
Robb Wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.