Medical journals publishing pure garbage

"Trust the science", they said!

Whilst we’re still trying to alert everybody as to the awfulness of studies on COVID-19 (especially concerning the vaccines) published in the major medical journals, another academic scandal has been rumbling on, essentially that major academic publishers are publishing useless and barely coherent articles by the bucketload. I spoke about ‘hyperprolific authors’ who publish hundreds of little worthless articles in proper medical journals last year, calling the issue ‘Sokal cubed’, but no-one seemed to care, and the problem continues apace. Now, however, the journals are allowing me to have my say, with major academic publisher Wolters Kluwer one of the first to show some transparency, and somehow also allowing me to sneak in some COVID-related stuff. Source. Highlights:

• Top academic publisher Wiley inadvertently made me aware of this issue by publishing a response to my research on COVID-19 vaccine efficacy/effectiveness and safety likely being exaggerated, quickly retracted it due to its embarrassingly poor quality.

• The authors were apparently annoyed, targeting me and my research on COVID-19 vaccines in a good proportion of their voluminous and pointless body of work. They make many false - arguably libellous - statements about me and my research, including contradictory statements indicating that I am both for and against the jabs, in journals published by top academic publishers such as Wolters Kluwer, Wiley, Springer, and Cambridge University Press.

• Apart from their many false, irrelevant, often bizarre, and even contradictory comments, the articles tend to be “riddled with typographical and grammatical errors”. Such a shame that garbage like this gets published so easily while people like me who were pretty much right about everything COVID-related continue to struggle to get into the major journals, even just to report basic facts.

With not all such pieces retracted, the publishers producing the journals containing the science we are supposed to trust apparently can’t tell the different between good and bad writing, let alone good and bad scientific arguments. Or maybe they’re too busy swimming in all that Big Pharma money.

Okay then.