Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardK
I didn't miss it, I let it go by because the author has an issue with well documented information (using only slight hyperbole) on the scale of claiming atoms don't exist... Accepting him as an authority is like accepting an actor without any paleontology but played one in a movie is now an expert on the topic.
He's nothing more than another charlatan who has glommed onto the current zeitgeist as a money maker. Comparing his credibility to real peer reviewed papers is incredibly inappropriate.
Ed
|
So, in a nutshell, no you didn't read the book, yet are willing to dismiss it out of hand in a prejudicial manner. Is that it? The book documents nearly all pertinent statements made with footnotes and appears to be well researched. And from what I have seen and heard personally from multiple other sources, appears to be dead on concerning not only the statements made, but also with implied concepts of how the pharmaceutical industry, notable private sponsors and government are working together. It is a VERY well written text that people should read, if for nothing else but to get a different perspective that perhaps they have never considered before.
As for "peer reviews", you seem oblivious to the possibility that "peers" are as corruptible as anyone else. You are apparently ignoring the power of what large sums of money can do to people's scruples.
But that is your opinion, and I am fine with you holding them dear. I am sorry, but I just do not share your world view.