Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Enlightened Moderns? (part II)
The discovery that amniotic stem cells are just as good as embryonic stem cells is the big story today. It's certainly big news, because it drives the final silver nail in the embryo-sucking vampire. (Or it would if anyone had any common sense.)
Big news to be sure, but it turns out this discovery isn't new news!
One of the scientists responsible for a breakthrough in stem-cell research has reported that he encountered heavy resistance to the publication of his work because it used stem cells obtained from amniotic fluids rather than from embryonic tissues.
Paolo De Coppi told the Italian ANSA news agency that a groundbreaking paper published this week in Nature Biotechnology had previously been rejected by four different journals. "It took seven years to get our paper published," he said.
Yes, that's right.
SEVEN YEARS.
Just one more proof, which we didn't really need, that the main job of 'peer review' in scientific journals is to enforce Leninist orthodoxy. ¶ 8:16 PM
Big news to be sure, but it turns out this discovery isn't new news!
One of the scientists responsible for a breakthrough in stem-cell research has reported that he encountered heavy resistance to the publication of his work because it used stem cells obtained from amniotic fluids rather than from embryonic tissues.
Paolo De Coppi told the Italian ANSA news agency that a groundbreaking paper published this week in Nature Biotechnology had previously been rejected by four different journals. "It took seven years to get our paper published," he said.
Yes, that's right.
SEVEN YEARS.
Just one more proof, which we didn't really need, that the main job of 'peer review' in scientific journals is to enforce Leninist orthodoxy. ¶ 8:16 PM
