Be watchful of the practice of “peer-reviewed.” This word has caused enormous damage to science and brought unthinkable (financial and health) sufferings to the public. The peer-reviewed process is implied and promoted as an independent review or assessment of the scientific claims or publications, which is inaccurate. Instead, it is a review process by people having the same expertise, interest, and mindset, with or without conflict of interest – like buddies. Certainly not independent or unbiased by any means as often assumed.
For example, often suggested that tens if not hundreds of studies and publications are available in “peer-reviewed” journals describing the isolation of the virus. Indeed, numerous publications explain the procedure or process, but no isolated virus is available anywhere. Therefore, anyone who asks for the isolated virus specimen is considered an outsider (not a peer) incapable of understanding the “science.” The question asked is not about the science but a specimen of the isolated virus.
It is like inquiring about a car. An inquirer is never required to have an engineering degree or work experience in the auto industry to examine or assess/review the car’s performance. Most valuable reviews are from the users of the vehicles, not by the automakers or the government authorities. Makers of the item do not provide reviews but advertisements. Unfortunately, in the medicines/pharmaceutical area, developers of the products (peers) provide reviews. For example, the virus exists, causes the illness, the PCR/antigen tests the virus, and vaccines work. These are the claims made by peers, not by the users or any independent third party.
Anyone who asks about specimens of the isolated virus, validation report for the PCR/antigen tests, vaccines’ safety, and efficacy tested against the virus is considered a conspiracy theorist or anti-vaxxer. Is anyone who asks questions about cars’ availability or performance considered anti-cars or anti-industry? Of course, not, but a smart buyer or consumer! The person wants the car, likes to buy it, and likes to make an informed decision.
On the other hand, in reality, “scientists,” experts, or peers (or so-called “vaxxers”) in the medical/pharmaceutical areas have nothing to show for their claims. They have simply been lying hidden under the cover of “peer reviews.”
So, in the future, if something is presented as being peer-reviewed for its authenticity, in particular medical/pharmaceutical areas, ignore it while requesting an independent audit or third-party review.