[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]
  [Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

[IP] RE; More on sweeteners, science, and . . .

>Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:10:07 -0400
>From: "James Handsfield" <email @ redacted>
>Subject: [IP] More on sweeteners, science, and . . .
>The test of sound research is publication in a journal that subjects
>manuscripts to blinded peer review (that is, the identity of the author(s)
>is not disclosed to the reviewers).  This is usually quite a rigorous
>process.  I've seen several papers rejected for publication because the
>project did not represent good scholarship.

Hmmm.  Is this really the case with medical publications?  All my work with
peer-reviewed journals involved physics, where authors were not blind.  And
it would have been fairly pointless since the first work usually cited by
authors are from their own group so it makes it pretty clear who wrote it in
any case.  Besides I always like looking up other publications by the same
group to insure that they weren't publishing the same paper over and over
(i.e. using the same data and posing the findings in a different way -
unethical in my opinion, but in a slightly gray area to others).

Oh and by the way (struggling to get back on topic) I agree with everything
else you said.

for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
send a DONATION http://www.Insulin-Pumpers.org/donate.shtml