News Ticker

‘Peer Reviewed’ Label Fraudulently Used on Scientific Literature

Attaching to scientific literature the the label of “peer reviewed” is a common practice among usual suspects to lend legitimacy to their pseudoscience and storytelling.

A prime example is literature related to transgenderism created by the World Professional Association of Transgender Health. Once a false body of work is spewed forth, perps and their lugenpresse cronies go to their favorite canard and call skeptics “deniers.” They are also supported by liberal grants from other sketchy characters. Winter Watch discussed this topic here.

Quentin Van Meter, M.D., FCP, is a pediatric endocrinologist who explains the method as applied to transgenderism. Van Meter was harassed and prevented from speaking at the University of Western Australia by a brood of pervert justice warriors (PJW).

Unfortunately, the “peer review” fraud has corrupted a whole body of so-called scientific literature. The journal Tumor Biology retracted 107 research papers after discovering that the authors faked the peer-review process. This isn’t the journal’s first rodeo. In late 2017, 58 papers were retracted from seven different journals — and 25 came from Tumor Biology for the same reason.

The publisher Springer in August 2015 retracted 64 articles from 10 different subscription journals “after editorial checks spotted fake email addresses, and subsequent internal investigations uncovered fabricated peer-review reports,” according to a statement on its website. The retractions came only months after BioMed Central, an open-access publisher also owned by Springer, retracted 43 articles for the same reason. This prompted the New England Journal of Medicine to weigh in on what it called the “hacking” of the scientific publishing process.

In 2005, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) created a software program called SCIgen that randomly combined strings of words to generate fake computer science papers. The objective of the exercise was to prove that the peer-review process was fundamentally flawed and the conferences and journals would accept meaningless papers. Scigen caught numerous culprits with their pants down.

In November 2014, Nature, the international weekly journal of science, published an article about “peer-review rings” in which peer-reviewers colluded to review each other’s work — and provide glowing reviews, of course.

Peer-review fraud is perfectly suited for ideological agendas. Authors are often asked to suggest potential reviewers for their own papers. This is done because research subjects are often an in-group niche, and a researcher working in a sub-sub-field may be more aware than the journal editor of who is best placed to assess the work.

But some journals go further and request, or allow, authors to submit the contact details of these potential reviewers. If the editor isn’t aware of the potential for a scam, they then merrily send the requests for review out to fake email addresses, often using the names of actual researchers. At the other end of the fake email address is someone who’s in on the game and happy to send in a friendly review. The editor may even be in on the game as well.

A website called Retraction Watch tracks the peer-review process and fraudulent science. It has discovered that individuals who have high retraction numbers are often unaffected in their career path. In other words, cheating pays. This hints at wink-wink dishonesty and gaming in the science professions generally. Researchers who commit scientific fraud are protected by privacy laws.

Even when a work is retracted, it frequently continues to be heavily cited by others. Notice the first article on Visfatin. It was retracted in 2007 after having been cited 276 times. However, after retraction, it was cited 942 more times.

In fields like psychology, low-effort frauds are much more difficult to detect when the results are statistical. One of the most monumental scientific frauds of all times was perped by Albert Kinsey in his sex “studies.” See “Albert Kinsey: The Lying Godfather of Fraudulent Sexual Research.” All of this agenda-driven “data” is locked up to this day and not subject to any scrutiny.

5 Comments on ‘Peer Reviewed’ Label Fraudulently Used on Scientific Literature

  1. This has been a problem since 1900, and beyond. Perversion of the sciences in more ways than one and most of all, the fallacy of the appeal to authority is used. Bringing us the wonderful US health system where god made foods such as cooked pork and beef are derided for pseudoscience and agriculture subsidies. Just this morning some “expert” on our local ABC affiliate said that coconut oil was the devil and would give you heart disease. Much of the science today is not true science, it is scientism, and its cultists all carry hammers looking for nails. Ending the funding to this type of anti-intellectual dogma is going to be very hard I’m afraid.

  2. The process used for capturing vital areas of the society is explained to a tee in the Reece Committee findings. Using big funding from the usual suspects, their foundations, or other murky vehicles like ngos, stables of “experts” are assembled that will push the narrative constantly in the desired direction, which is averted from truth. This was done to education and medicine by starting the (((American Historical Association)) and the hallowed (((American Medical Association))). The latter had a central role in railroading Royal Rife into oblivion, the guy invented the cure for many (maybe all?)maladies, and the AMA made it clear back in the 1930s -40s-50s that they were opposed to this technology, reading from royal-rife.com:
    What Happened?

    If all this is true, why aren’t doctors today using the Rife machine for cancer and other diseases? What you are about to read may seem unbelievable, but books by Barry Lynes and numerous websites have reported this information. We are repeating it here for you.

    According to reports, by 1939, almost all of the forty-four doctors attending the banquet to honor Raymond Rife were denying they had ever met him. Allegations are that drug companies, bent on stifling the Rife technologies, waged war and won.

    Dr. Milbank Johnson

    Dr. Milbank Johnson, who held the banquet in Dr. Rife’s honor, was about to announce the results of the 1934 study of the sixteen cancer patients who were reportedly cured. However, he never got to make that announcement. It is reported that just hours before making the announcement, he was fatally poisoned and his papers were “lost.”

    Dr. Rife’s Work and Laboratory

    It is reported that Morris Fishbein, sole stockholder of the American Medical Association, tried unsuccessfully to buy the rights to the Rife machines. Soon afterwards, written records, stop motion photographs, film and other evidence of Rife’s work began disappearing. Part of his Universal Microscope’s nearly 6,000 pieces went missing. It is reported that the police then entered his laboratory, ransacked it and took the rest of his research records.

    Dr. Nemes

    Dr. Nemes, who had duplicated some of Rife’s experiments, was killed in a suspicious fire. His records were also destroyed in the fire.

    The Burnett Laboratory

    Just as scientists at the multi-million dollar Burnett Laboratory located in New Jersey were about to announce they had validated the Rife technology, the laboratory was also destroyed by a suspicious fire.

    Other Doctors

    Reports are that doctors who defended Dr. Rife and his work lost their hospital privileges and foundation grants.

    The Beam Ray Corporation

    The Beam Ray Corporation was the only company manufacturing the Rife Beam Ray machine. Royal Rife was not a partner of the Beam Ray Corporation. It is reported that, in 1939, agents of a family controlling the drug industry brought a law suit against the corporation. The law suit brought an end to commercial manufacture of the Rife generators.

    Medical Journals

    It is reported that medical journals, which were almost entirely supported by revenue from drug companies and controlled by the American Medical Association, refused to publish any paper supporting the Rife technology.

    Arthur Kendall

    Arthur Kendall, director of the Northwestern School of Medicine,worked with Dr. Rife in his research on the cancer virus. It is reported that he accepted almost $250,000 and retired to Mexico. Remember, this was during the depression. $250,000 was an exorbitant amount then.

    Dr. George Dock

    Dr. George Dock collaborated Dr. Rife’s work. Reports are that he accepted an enormous grant from the American Medical Association which also bestowed on him their highest honors. He also became silent.

  3. Well, I could actually go on and on about this topic.

    Here’s how Nature describes itself: “Nature is a weekly international journal publishing the finest peer-reviewed research”

    Just yesterday, I watched this video with Dr. Andrew Kaufman calling BS (and basically scientific FRAUD) on an article in Nature:

    Evidence that Viruses Cause Disease or The Rooster in the River of Rats (improved audio)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvcEIarencM

    *****
    Side note on our current situation:

    It’s absolutely maddening to me that humanity is about to be enslaved in this new digital financial system, and yet the stupid humans haven’t even figured out the current financial system. I’ve given plenty of links (Bill Still’s The Money Masters and Money as Debt), but nobody seems interested–it’s as though intellectual curiosity has been socially engineered out of them. And what’s even more maddening is that the solution is seemingly simple: all Congress has to do is take back the power to create and issue currency. But they are either too brainwashed or too corrupt and owned by the bankers.

    http://www.xat.org/xat/moneyhistory.html

    Abraham Lincoln:
    “The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers….. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government’s greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power.”

    James Madison:
    “History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance.”

  4. “The WHO is a lobby group for the powerful globalists who own it.

    In its 2017 report the WHO accounted for $2.1 billion it received from private foundations and global corporations, compared to just over $1 billion voluntarily provided by governments.

    The third-largest single contributor in 2017 was GAVI, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation, they contributed nearly $134 million. GAVI are partnered with the WHO, UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Bank to sell vaccines globally.

    The largest individual payment, by some margin, at nearly $325 million came from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).

    Among other beneficiaries of BMGF are the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium (VIMC) led by Professor Neil Ferguson, at Imperial College London, directly funded by the BMGF and GAVI, to provide statistical data analysis for BMGF and GAVI in order to sell more vaccines.

    Prof. Ferguson led the team who created the hopelessly inaccurate prediction which the US and UK governments based their lockdown regimes upon

    Ferguson also co-founded the MRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modelling who worked with the WHO in 2009 to create ridiculous computer models predicting the H1N1 pandemic.

    This resulted in billions being spent on very expensive pointless vaccines and unnecessary medication, benefting manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline, Roche and Novartis, among the largest contributors to the WHO in 2008/2009.

    With an $84 million investment, Swiss pharmaceutical giant Roche were the largest single contributor into the WHO that year. Sales of their unnecessary Tamiflu H1N1 medication rocketed to more than £3 billion following the WHO’s declared H1N1 pandemic. Which was just a coincidence.

    From GAVI to the WHO and from the BMGF to Imperial College the response to the C19 pandemic has been driven by foundations and pharmaceutical corporations with considerable investments in vaccine development. Of course they would like to see global mandatory vaccination.

    ID2020 is a globalist initiative which intends to provide everyone on earth with an authorised identity. GAVI, Microsoft, BMGF and the Rockerfeller Foundation are among the happy ID2020 alliance who will decide who you are allowed to be.”

    https://off-guardian.org/2020/04/20/coronavirus-lockdown-and-what-you-are-not-being-told-part-2/

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this: