25
Comments (16)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
11
axolotl_peyotl [S] 11 points ago +11 / -0

source

iTs JuSt A pRePrInt

it was "just" a little jab too, amirite?

5
RandomAnon78 5 points ago +6 / -1

The different of this preprint compared to others is the senior author who is the editor of the BMJ

2
Zap_Powerz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, but is this senior editor published? Peer reviewed? What does Science have to say about this editor? I did a quick google search and snopes says this guy is a crack pot conspiracy theorist practicing pseudoscience and not real Science.

Praise Science.

2
ImBillCurtis 2 points ago +2 / -0

I love when people bring up “peer reviewed” as some kind of gotcha. It lets me know they have an 8th grade education and zero understanding of how actual research organizations operate.

3
Zap_Powerz 3 points ago +3 / -0

source?

(Hope you know Im being sarcastic)

1
RandomAnon78 1 point ago +2 / -1

I was wrong. He is not the chief editor.

Here is his profile https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/editorial-staff/peter-doshi