Guest guest Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 , " Bob Flaws " <pemachophel2001> wrote: > > In that case, the next question to ask yourself is, " What do I mean as > a peer? " In other words, a peer to whom? I believe it was Todd who > recently addressed this issue on this forum. On the one hand, any CO > Lic.Ac. is a peer of any other CO Lic.Ac. On the other hand, if you > mean a board of experts who can judge the quality of work submitted > for publication, that's a whole other issue. Todd just today raised > that very same question in another thread on the HVC study. I hadn't even connected these two posts in this way, so your point is well taken. The peer review of the HCV study was clearly done by reviewers who are no peers of mine. They were unable to identify a huge glaring flaw. And there can be only one explanation. the reviewers were completely unfamiliar with the actual published literature on HCV treatment in the PRC. This is inexcusable and really calls into question the credibility of the journal in all its prior and future publications as well. Basically, if no member of your team can do a literature review in chinese, you have no right to do such a study. Being unable to do a literature review of prior studies violates one of the basic tenets of research design. I see at least one L.Ac. was involved in this study. Perhaps he should be contacted directly to rectify this matter. Why didn't he identify the flaw? Someone needs to take the fall and I think it should be whatever supposed " expert " made this lame decison in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.