There's been no peer reviews of this study or any long term studies on its efficacy. I'm not sure I understand why the CDC isn't all over this mandating its use.
Yes, correct Open access research is peer-reviewed however there is a financial incentive to publish a paper and also publication is the editor's decision. Meaning, that even if reviewers suggested that the paper is not fit for publication in their opinion, the paper can still get published if the editor think it is worth it.
The above applies to both open access and traditional journal.
There is immense pressure in academics and scholars to publish to get their next grant and secure their job or career progression.
However, as you suggested i stopped having faith in the traditional journals.
My issue with this paper is the in vitro methodology. Dandelion is available for consumption so they could eailyt do a pilot study on humans.
There's been no peer reviews of this study or any long term studies on its efficacy. I'm not sure I understand why the CDC isn't all over this mandating its use.
It's an Open Access journal. You know what that means, rught?
Yes, correct Open access research is peer-reviewed however there is a financial incentive to publish a paper and also publication is the editor's decision. Meaning, that even if reviewers suggested that the paper is not fit for publication in their opinion, the paper can still get published if the editor think it is worth it.
The above applies to both open access and traditional journal.
There is immense pressure in academics and scholars to publish to get their next grant and secure their job or career progression.
However, as you suggested i stopped having faith in the traditional journals.
My issue with this paper is the in vitro methodology. Dandelion is available for consumption so they could eailyt do a pilot study on humans.
I see what you did there…